alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Excess items find new home through requisition

/ Published Aug. 24, 2021
BATTLE CREEK, Mich., 
The Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services team on Eglin Air Force Base recently released 267 requisitions of property to customers, totaling nearly $1.5 million. Items that found a new home through the reutilization, transfer or donation process included safety ladders, medical supplies, and even refrigerators.

                DLA Disposition Services remove scrap on while Eglin Air Force Base.                            Defense Department Requisition                            DLA Disposition Services remove scrap on while Eglin Air Force Base.            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: DLA Disposition ServicesVIRIN: 210823-D-D0441-201The requisition of government property is one of the primary missions of DLA Disposition Services. The agency repurposes ­– or disposes of – excess DoD property.

When a Defense Department agency no longer needs an item, that doesn’t necessarily mean the item’s usefulness is at an end. Vehicles, office furniture and other items are still sought after by other entities within DoD and outside agencies. When an item is declared as excess and no longer needed, the property begins its requisition journey.

“If usable the property either goes through the reutilization process – where it’s offered to DoD, gets transferred to other federal agencies or is donated to state agencies or authorized organizations,” said Barbara DeNamur, a supervisory property disposal specialist on Eglin AFB.

Reutilization, transfer and donation to other organizations are the means that Disposition Services uses to complete this process. Defense Departments receive the first offers of property reutilization but if there is no need within DoD other organizations are then given an opportunity to receive the property.

Property is either physically turned in or transferred to Disposition Services through receipt in place procedures. That item then goes through a screening process to determine the demilitarization requirements, as well as the reutilization or scrap classification before becoming available to customers.

Through this requisition process military forces and other agencies around the globe benefit from equipment and materiel that would otherwise have been unavailable to them without this capability, often providing the gaining agency significant cost avoidance. This is one of the biggest benefits from the process as customers only pay for shipping costs. 

“Our efforts not only directly support the needs of our warfighters but also saves the taxpayers millions of dollars’ worth of property that can be reused for other purposes,” DeNamur said. “We also support disaster relief at home, humanitarian assistance and foreign military sales programs.”

For items that are identified as usable, qualified customers can search for property on RTD Web – a site that acts as a property hub for the Defense Department. Property that is identified as scrap after DEMIL is then disposed of or sold to the public.
# Celebrating the Life and Ideals of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. - DLA Distribution Commanding General's Message 

/ Published Jan. 15, 2021
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
Happy New Year Distribution Teammates,

Each year, on the third Monday in January, the Department of Defense joins the nation in honoring the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. by making the holiday a day of community service—“A Day On, Not A Day Off.” This year, the Martin Luther King Jr. Day of service will be recognized on Monday, January 18, 2021.

This day was set aside in 1995 when Congress designated Martin Luther King Jr. Day as the first and only federal holiday observed as a national day of service, a way to channel King’s life and teaching into community action. We remember Dr. King as America’s advocate of nonviolence and a leader of the Civil Rights Movement. He challenged us to live up to the ideals enshrined in our founding documents — that we are all created equal, endowed with unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Our EEO office did an excellent job of highlighting the extraordinary life and legacy of the undaunted champion of Peace in this month’s bulletin. In celebration of Dr. King, each of us can contribute to strengthening our own communities by serving in our neighborhoods and volunteering our time. While we may not be able to observe the holiday in all the same ways we did pre-COVID, there are still many ways to honor Dr. King’s memory while staying safe including participation in virtual events. Additionally, we can safely drop off donations at local food banks or shelters to help those in need.

While we approach the extended weekend, I’d like to remind each of you that we are still in the midst of a pandemic. The CDC continues to report that COVID-19 cases across the Nation continue to rise. We need to continue to be vigilant, to make smart decisions and to protect one another by wearing a mask, social distancing, washing hands and staying home if you are sick or if you are awaiting COVID-19 test results. We have a responsibility to our families, to our co-workers and to our customers.

Mr. Knight and I would like to thank you for everything you do to support our Warfighters and our federal partners. Keep striving for excellence and look after one another. Stay safe!

BGen Keith D. Reventlow, USMCCommanding GeneralDLA Distribution
ORICINAt.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0465

SIEBEN RANCH COMPANY, )

)

Plaintiff and Appellee, )

)

v. )

)

RANDALL G. ADAMS, a/k/a )

RANDY ADAMS, aik/a RAY )

ADAMS; and LEE McDonald, )

)

Defendants and Appellants. )

)

ORDER

FILED

NOV 1 9 2020

Bowen GreenwoOCI

Clerk of Supreme Court

Štate nf Ninntann

Defendant and Appellant pursuant to rule 26(1), M.R.App.P.,

moves for an extension of time in which to file and serve his opening

brief in this matter and there being no objection from Plaintiff and

Appellee;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Defendant and Appellant is

granted an extension of time until January 4, 2021, in which to file and

serve his opening brief in this matter.

11/19/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0465
The Clerk is directed to mail true copies of this order to an

counsel of record.

DRIED this day of November, 2020.

For the Court,
# Missouri Court of Appeals

Southern District

JULY 6, 2015

THE FOLLOWING CASES WERE AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 84.16(b).

1. Case No. SD33479

Re: CODY G. PARSONS,

Appellant,

vs. STATE OF MISSOURI,

Respondent.
No. 12-891.

#### Schafler *v.*Field et al.

C. A. 4th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0635

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

SAUL JAMES DOOLING,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including August 18, 2023, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 12 2023

07/12/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0635

FILED

Bowen Greenwood

CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF MONTANA

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 12 2023

07/12/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0635
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SAN FRANCISCO DRYDOCK and

SIGNAL MUTUAL INDEMNITY

ASSOCIATION, LTD.,

 Petitioners,

 v.

CAMILO E. ZAPANTA and DIRECTOR,

OFFICE OF WORKERS’

COMPENSATION PROGRAM,

 Respondents.

No. 13-73130

BRB No. 13-0215

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Benefits Review Board

Argued and Submitted November 18, 2015 

San Francisco, California

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Petitioner San Francisco Drydock (“Drydock”) seeks review of an award of

disability benefits to Camilo Zapanta under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’

FILED

DEC 07 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

 
Compensation Act (“LHWCA”), 33 U.S.C. §§ 901–950. We have jurisdiction

under 33 U.S.C. § 921(c), and we affirm.

I

The ALJ’s finding that Zapanta intended to work two jobs is clearly

supported by substantial evidence. The ALJ credited Zapanta’s testimony that he

intended to keep both jobs—a determination to which we give “great weight.” See

Healy Tibbitts Builders, Inc. v. Dir., Office of Workers’ Comp. Programs, 444 F.3d

1095, 1103 (9th Cir. 2006) (citation omitted). Moreover, Zapanta continued to

work at both jobs for at least eight days following his injury, and he worked two

jobs on previous occasions. Likewise, Zapanta’s Drydock supervisor testified that

Zapanta “was not normally a swing shift person and worked the swing shift to

accommodate his Berlex job”—a fact that the ALJ reasonably interpreted as

supporting Zapanta’s testimony that he intended to continue working at both jobs. 

The fact that the ALJ placed less weight on written documentation and more

weight on Zapanta’s testimony, his post-injury conduct, and the testimony of his

supervisor “is no basis for [this Court] to disturb [the ALJ’s] ruling.” See id. at

1103.

2
II

Likewise, contrary to Drydock’s assertions, the ALJ did not fail to consider

the shrinking nature of the Bay Area ship repair industry when determining

Zapanta’s average weekly wage. On the contrary, the ALJ recognized that

calculation of Zapanta’s average weekly wage “should take into consideration the

sporadic nature of the work that was available.” As such, the ALJ rejected

Zapanta’s argument that his average weekly wage should be calculated based on

full-time shipyard earnings, and instead determined that wage by calculating

Zapanta’s actual earnings from his shipyard jobs during the fifty-two weeks

preceding his injury. That method of calculation is surely

one that a “reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support [the ALJ’s]

conclusion.” Rhine v. Stevedoring Servs. of Am., 596 F.3d 1161, 1165 (9th Cir.

2010) (quoting Metro. Stevedore Co. v. Rambo, 521 U.S. 121, 149 (1997)).

III

Because Drydock has conceded at oral argument that its additional claims

are waived, we do not address them.

AFFIRMED.

3
# Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management Susquehanna receives new Division Chief

/ Published Aug. 1, 2021
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa., 
Amy Snyder assumes the role of Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, Division Chief for Security & Emergency Services today.

Snyder brings a wealth of experience with her that she has accumulated over 17 years of specialized experience at DLA Installation Management Susquehanna, Security & Emergency Services.

She is grateful to have been selected for the role.

“It is an honor to be selected to lead the great team of DLA Installation Management Susquehanna fire, police and security professionals at the Defense Distribution Center, Susquehanna,” she said. “Our team will continue to work collaboratively with our installation partners to provide premier Security & Emergency Services to our community.”

Rob Montefour, the DLA Installation Management Susquehanna site director, believes that Snyder is a great candidate for the position.

“Amy is highly qualified for this new role and brings a wealth of knowledge and experience, much of it acquired right here at Susquehanna,” Montefour said. “Amy brings a balance of superior leadership, technical and customer service skills that will serve our organization well as we move forward.”

Snyder earned a bachelor’s degree in criminal justice from the Pennsylvania State University in 2004 and is currently pursuing a master’s degree in strategic leadership & management at the Pennsylvania State University. As a testament to Snyder’s outstanding performance and higher leadership potential, she was selected for and graduated from the Executive Development Program at Harvard Kennedy School in May 2019.

For the past five years, Snyder has done an outstanding job serving as the deputy chief of Security & Emergency Services at Susquehanna. Before, her assignment as the deputy chief, Snyder was chief of the Security Management Branch, where she oversaw the Installation’s security programs, the Emergency Communications Center and the Pass and I.D. Card Office. Before this assignment, Amy was Susquehanna Installation’s Crime and Loss Prevention Manager and the General Investigator.

Snyder will work closely with George Hokkanen, the current Security & Emergency Services Division Chief, to ensure a smooth transition before his retirement in September 2021.
160 A.3d 709

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. MALCOLM C. HAGANS, DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

February 13, 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 granted, limited to the issue of whether the consent to search the motor vehicle was freely and voluntarily given; and it is further

ORDERED that the appellant may serve and file a supplemental brief on or before April 14, 2017, and respondent may serve and file a supplemental brief forty-five (46) days after the filing of *162appellant’s supplemental submission, or, if appellant declines to file such a submission, on or before May 30, 2017.
161 A.3d 764

#### DEBRA S. SMERLING, PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER, AND MAGDA CLAUDE AND SHEILA SMERLING, PLAINTIFFS, v. HARRAH’S ENTERTAINMENT, INC., HARRAH’S OPERATING COMPANY, INC., D/B/A HARRAH’S ATLANTIC CITY, AND HARRAH’S ATLANTIC CITY, INC., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

March 9, 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, with costs.
Exhibit 32.2

 

**                                                THE MONARCH CEMENT COMPANY                                                   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 Quarterly Report of The Monarch Cement Company (the"Company") onForm 10-Qfor the quarter ended September 30, 2008, as filed with theSecurities and ExchangeCommission on the datehereof (the "Report"), theundersigned, in the capacity and on the dateindicated below, hereby certifiespursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

(1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to TheMonarchCement Company and will be retained by The MonarchCement Company and furnishedto the Securitiesand Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

 

Dated:  November 7, 2008

                                                                                           /s/ Debra P. Roe                                                                                                                      Debra P. Roe, CPA                                                                                            Chief Financial Officer and                                                                                            Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
Communication systems are key to timely warnings during emergencies
 
  By William H. Bullock Sr., Installation Emergency Manager DLA Installation Management Richmond
  Communication is probably the most important critical issue that can profoundly impact the outcomes of an emergency. Communication is essential because, without effective, continuous, and consistent communication, all the other areas of emergency management would be unmanageable. A mass warning notification system, or MWNS, is a series of platforms that send one-way messages to inform the workforce of an emergency.  Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management Richmond uses several systems to notify the Defense Supply Center Richmond workforce about emergencies: AtHoc, Giant Voice, and the internal public address systems. AtHoc is an interactive warning system that allows installation leadership to inform people of urgent information such as base closures or delayed openings, shelter-in-place or seek shelter, or awareness of possible installation emergencies. The system notifies users via phone call, text message or email. This same system provides pop-up notifications to employees through desktop workstations DLA employees on DSCR can download the Blackberry AtHoc app from either the Apple or Google app stores. This application is another option for those who don't want to enter their personal email and phone number in the AtHoc system.  The process can be found here: AtHoc Mobile App Instructions. *(DLA Common Access Card required)* The Giant Voice system is a modern air-raid siren with the ability to play pre-recorded and live messages with high clarity over a massive area. The best usage of the Giant Voice is in providing mass notification for people in outdoor areas. The Giant Voice is not suitable for use within buildings and must not be used in place of an individual building mass notification system. The Giant Voice is used for severe weather, like a tornado or hurricane, or an installation-wide emergency. The bottom line is, if you hear the Giant Voice and you do not hear 'This is a test' or “exercise, exercise, exercise,” you need to follow the instructions in the message immediately. The internal public address system, IPA, is essential for fast and controlled response to emergencies, giving instructions and reducing panic.  IPA can remotely broadcast emergency notification messages through pre-recorded and live broadcast methods. The interior of DLA buildings on DSCR have communication systems that allow for internal notification to the workforce to take action according to the emergency. Another method of notification, not provided by DLA Installation Management Richmond, comes through a Federal Emergency Management Agency mobile application.  The application provides real-time alerts from the National Weather Service for up to five locations nationwide, assistance locating open emergency shelters and disaster recovery centers in your area.  It also helps you prepare for disasters with a customizable emergency kit checklist, emergency family plan, and reminders.  It can be found at: FEMA Mobile App and Text Messages.
================================================================================

                                                                    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 of Terra Systems, Inc., on Form
10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Clayton Timothy, CEO of
the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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 14, 2008


/s/ Clayton Timothy
------------------------------
Clayton Timothy
CEO
(Principal Executive Officer)



















--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#### In the Matter of Abigail Baron-Morrison, Respondent, v Arthur Morrison, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 354]

—In a child support proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 4, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Edlitz, J.), dated May 1, 2002, which denied his objections to an order of the same court (Furman, H.E.), dated March 25, 2002, which, after a hearing, found that he willfully violated *634a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Shapiro, J.), dated December 23, 1997, and, inter alia, directed him to pay arrears in the amount of $80,579.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Family Court properly denied the father’s objections. The father’s failure to pay the support required by the December 23, 1997, judgment constituted prima facie evidence of a willful violation of the judgment *(see*Family Ct Act § 454 [3] [a]). The burden then shifted to the father to offer competent, credible evidence of his inability to comply with the judgment *(see*Family Ct Act § 455 [5]; *Matter of Powers v Powers,*86 NY2d 63, 69-70 [1995]). The father failed to sustain that burden *(see Matter of Commissioner of Social Servs. [Edwards] v Rosen,*289 AD2d 487, 488 [2001]). Santucci, J.P., Adams, Crane and Cozier, JJ., concur.
No. 12-7250.

#### Chatman *v.*Florida.

Dist. Ct. App. Fla., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM MSI
HOLDINGS, INC. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE SIX MONTH PERIOD ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         469,418
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  352,537
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,386,423
<PP&E>                                       2,805,347
<DEPRECIATION>                                 822,712
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,369,058
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,501,960
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    381,630
<COMMON>                                     2,313,508
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,714,551)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,369,058
<SALES>                                        890,003
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               890,003
<CGS>                                          812,729
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  812,729
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,303,095
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             259,342
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,485,163)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,485,163)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,485,163)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.25)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.25)


</TABLE>