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

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2217

To restrict accompanied tours for Armed Forces personnel assigned to

Europe.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 21 (legislative day, JUNE 7), 1994

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself and Mr. FEINGOLD) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To restrict accompanied tours for Armed Forces personnel

assigned to Europe.

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

3 SECTION 1. ACCOMPANIED TOURS FOR ARMED FORCES

4 PERSONNEL ASSIGNED TO EUROPE.

5 (a) PAYMENT FOR DEPENDENTS.—

6 (1) RESTRICTION.—Subject to paragraph (2)—

7 (A) no travel and transportation expenses

8 may be paid for dependents to accompany mem9 bers of the Armed Forces of the United States
2

•S 2217 IS

1 assigned to permanent duty ashore in Europe;

2 and

3 (B) no funds may be expended for support

4 of dependents accompanying members of the

5 Armed Forces of the United States assigned to

6 permanent duty ashore in Europe.

7 (2) WAIVER AUTHORITY.—

8 (A) ESSENTIAL PERSONNEL.—The Sec9 retary of Defense may waive the application of

10 paragraph (1) to a member of the Armed

11 Forces if the Secretary determines that the as12 signment of that member to permanent duty

13 ashore in Europe for a period of more than one

14 year is necessary in order to ensure the con15 tinuity of effective conduct of necessary activi16 ties of the Armed Forces of the United States

17 in Europe.

18 (B) NATIONAL SECURITY INTERESTS.—

19 The Secretary of Defense may waive the appli20 cation of paragraph (1) when necessary in the

21 national security interests of the United States.

22 (b) SHORT TOURS.—It is the sense of Congress that

23 the period of assignment of a member of the Armed

24 Forces to permanent duty ashore in Europe should not

25 exceed one year.
3

•S 2217 IS

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 109 (Monday, June 8, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 31208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15098]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-232-000]


National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Proposed Changes 
in FERC Gas Tariff

June 2, 1998.
    Take notice that on May 29, 1998, National Fuel Gas Supply 
Corporation (National) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume No. 1, Fifth Revised Sheet No. 8, with a 
proposed effective date of July 1, 1998.
    National states that this filing reflects the quarterly adjustment 
to the reservation component of the EFT rate pursuant to the 
Transportation and Storage Cost Adjustment (TSCA) provision set forth 
in Section 23 of the General Terms and Conditions of National's FERC 
Gas Tariff.
    In addition, National states that the filing reflects National's 
agreement to buyout the final two years of transportation service under 
Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee) Contract No. 7394. The 
buyout agreement with Tennessee terminates the Contract two years 
early, effective at the end of October 1998. The buyout will save 
National's EFT customers approximately $750,000.00.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-15098 Filed 6-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
|                                                                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                 
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                         
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                   
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                                   
|View History:                                                                                    
|                                                                                                 
|Price of  U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Exports by Vessel to Spain (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                 
|                                                                                                 
|Price of  U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Exports by Vessel to Spain (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                 

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        | --     | 4.92   | 4.94   | 4.59   | 5.39  
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 5.60   | 8.27   | 11.46  | 7.55   |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
Exhibit 15.1**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-117509, No.333-130852 and No. 333-136684 on Form S-8 of our report dated June 25,2007 relating to theconsolidated financial statements of Elbit Medical Imaging Ltd. and its subsidiaries, (which reportexpresses an unqualified opinion and includes explanatory paragraphs relating to: (1) thedifferences between accounting principles generally accepted in Israel and accounting principlesgenerally accepted in the United States of America; (2) the presentation of the “reported amounts”and “adjusted values”; (3) claims that have been filed against Group companies and for some ofthose claims petitions have been filed for certification as class actions; (4) the adoption ofAccounting Standards No. 19 No. 21 and 24 and (5) the translation of New Israeli Shekel amountsinto U.S. dollar amounts), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Elbit Medical ImagingLtd. for the year ended December 31, 2006.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 111 (Wednesday, June 10, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 31716]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15567]


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

ASSASSINATION RECORDS REVIEW BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting

DATE: June 17, 1998.

PLACE: ARRB, 600 E Street, NW, Washington, DC.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
    1. Review and Accept Minutes of Closed Meeting.
    2. Review of Assassination Records.
    3. Other Business.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Eileen Sullivan, Press Officer, 
600 E Street, NW, Second Floor, Washington, DC 20530. Telephone: (202) 
724-0088; Fax: (202) 724-0457.
T. Jeremy Gunn,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 98-15567 Filed 6-8-98; 11:52 am]
BILLING CODE 6118-01-M
#### La Magica LLC, Appellant, v 145 Atlantic LLC, Respondent.

[61 NYS3d 492]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Anil C. Singh, J.), *516entered on or about March 9, 2016, which denied plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction, and order, same court and Justice, entered on or about July 20, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiffs motion to renew, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly determined that plaintiff had failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits, thus requiring denial of the motion for a preliminary injunction *(see Gama Aviation Inc. v Sandton Capital Partners, L.P.,*93 AD3d 570 [1st Dept 2012]). The authenticity of plaintiffs claimed 2009 agreement acquiring the right to use the trade name allegedly used by defendant was undermined by evidence that plaintiff had sought to acquire the right to use the trade name after 2009. Even if some evidence of such later attempts constituted hearsay, the other evidence submitted by defendant was sufficient to undermine the authenticity of the purported agreement.

Plaintiffs renewal motion was properly denied because, even if there was a reasonable excuse for the failure to submit the new evidence on the original motion, it would not have altered the outcome *(see*CPLR 2221 [e]). Although the new evidence purported to show the authenticity of the 2009 agreement, the original ruling hinged not on direct evidence of forgery of the agreement, but on the inference arising from plaintiffs principal’s post-2009 conduct.

We have considered plaintiff’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Maz-zarelli, Webber and Oing, JJ.
No. 09-1509.

#### Coast Automotive Group, Ltd., et al., Petitioners v. Mercedes Benz, U.S.A., et al.

562 U.S. 837, 131 S. Ct. 165,

178 L. Ed. 2d 41,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 5774.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 362 Fed. Appx. 332.
No. 12-552.

#### Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd., et al. *v.*International Trade Commission et al.

C. A. Fed. Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jose Velez, Appellant.

[63 NYS3d 36]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Patricia M. Núñez, J. at hearing; Richard Carruthers, J. at plea and sentencing), rendered January 8, 2014, convicting defendant of robbery in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second *528felony offender, to a term of three to six years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant’s suppression motion. We conclude that the police had probable cause to arrest defendant for robbery. After seeing a man argue with, chase, and attempt to hit defendant, the police learned that each man was claiming to have just been robbed by the other. The police reasonably credited the complainant’s account, given its level of detail and its consistency with the circumstances that the officers observed *(see People v Lopez,*258 AD2d 388 [1st Dept 1999], *lv denied*93 NY2d 1022 [1999]). Accordingly, the police lawfully arrested defendant and recovered a razor blade, money, and a wallet.

Defendant did not preserve his claim that the closed container search of his wallet, in which a second razor blade was found, was unlawful because it was not supported by exigent circumstances *(see People v Miranda,*27 NY3d 931, 932-933 [2016]; *People v Frierson,*137 AD3d 444, 445 [1st Dept 2016], *lv denied*27 NY3d 1069 [2015]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find that to the extent the limited record permits review *(see People v Martin,*50 NY2d 1029, 1031 [1980]), it establishes the requisite exigency *(see People v Jimenez,*22 NY3d 717 [2014]). Notwithstanding that defendant had been handcuffed by the time the wallet was searched, the wallet was within his grabbable area and had not been reduced to the exclusive control of the police. Furthermore, the officers had reason to suspect that it might contain a weapon, because defendant had been arrested for robbery, a violent crime, and the officers had already recovered one razor blade from defendant.

Concur — Tom, J.P., Richter, Andrias, Gesmer and Singh, JJ.
To: Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 
From: "Tanya Parise" <tparise@alpha-gamma.com> 
Date: 08/19/2009 10:15AM 
cc: "Brad Nelson" <Nelson.Brad@Ecrweb.Com> 
Subject: SSM Recommendations

Melanie, 
 
I went through the RTC document, looked at some engine manufacturers operating manuals, 
and some other information we've gotten on the SSM issue and summarized the 
recommendations in the attachment.  I was waiting to see if EMA, API, and INGAA would 
provide some more information on this topic and I would include that, but we've only heard 
back from EMA.  
 
Based on the information we have, for startup, it seems that specifying a time limit of 30 
minutes might be appropriate and include the provision to petition the Administrator if 
additional time is needed in special cases.  
 
I can formalize the information into a memo if you want.  Just let me know, but I just 
wanted to get the information out to you. 
 
Tanya 
 
Tanya Parise 
Senior Chemical Engineer 
Alpha-Gamma Technologies, Inc. 
3301 Benson Drive, Suite 535 
Raleigh, NC 27609 
Phone : (919) 954-0033 ext: 109 
Fax : (919) 954-0379 
Email : tparise@alpha-gamma.com 
URL : http://www.alpha-gamma.com
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2280

To provide for an orderly process to ensure compensation for the termination

of an easement or the taking of real property used for public utility

purposes at the Manassas National Battlefield Park, Virginia, and for

other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 13 (legislative day, JULY 11), 1994

Mr. ROBB (for himself and Mr. WARNER) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources

A BILL

To provide for an orderly process to ensure compensation

for the termination of an easement or the taking of

real property used for public utility purposes at the Manassas National Battlefield Park, Virginia, 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 ‘‘Manassas National

5 Battlefield Park Amendments of 1994’’.
2

•S 2280 IS

1 SEC. 2. ORDERLY TERMINATION.

2 Subsection (b)(2)(C) of the first section of the Act

3 entitled ‘‘An Act to preserve within Manassas National

4 Battlefield Park, Virginia, the most important historic

5 properties relating to the battle of Manassas, and for other

6 purposes’’, approved April 17, 1954 (16 U.S.C.

7 429b(b)(2)(C)) is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing new sentence: ‘‘If, pursuant to this paragraph, the

9 United States takes property (including taking a property

10 right by terminating an easement) used for public utility

11 purposes, the owner of the property or the grantee of the

12 easement may, not later than 9 years after the date of

13 enactment of the Manassas National Battlefield Park

14 Amendments of 1994, initiate a proceeding in a court of

15 competent jurisdiction seeking a determination of just

16 compensation with respect to the taking of the property.’’.

Æ
No. 12-7442.

#### Bower *v.*Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction.

C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 14 (Thursday, January 22, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 3355]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1474]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-34,077]


Pikes Peak Greenhouses, Incorporated, Colorado Springs, Colorado; 
Notice of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on December 8, 1997 in response to a worker petition 
which was filed on behalf of workers at Pikes Peak Greenhouses, 
Incorporated, Colorado Springs, Colorado.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no 
purpose; and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 8th day of January, 1998.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 98-1474 Filed 1-21-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 26, 2018

No. 04-18-00217-CR

Juan HERNANDEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 144th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017CR11271

Honorable Lorina I. Rummel, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is hereby GRANTED. The 

Appellant’s brief is due on October 31, 2018.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

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

court on this 26th day of October, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
2017-1485.

#### State ex rel. Cruz-Altunar v. Franklin Cty. Common Pleas Court.

In Mandamus. On respondents’ motions to dismiss. Motions granted. Cause dismissed.

O’Connor, C.J., and O’Donnell, Kennedy, French, Fischer, and DeWine, JJ., concur.

O’Neill, J., not participating.
No. 10-5108.

#### Gustavo Sierra, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 904, 131 S. Ct. 242,

178 L. Ed. 2d 161,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6441.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

*162Same case below, 600 F.3d 263.
# DLA-IP employees receive USFK Civilian of the Year award

/ Published Dec. 3, 2021
CAMP HUMPHREYS, Korea, 
Commander U.S. Forces Korea Army General Paul J. LaCamera presented three Defense Logistics Agency Indo-Pacific employees Nov. 17 with the USFK Civilian of the Year award. They were, Jason Cadieux, J6 information technology specialist, Soyoung Ki, J6 management and program analyst and Chong Ung Kim, Troop Support general supply specialist and administrator, selected over 66 nominees to win top honors for their respective categories technician, customer service and administration. 

“Our superb legion of dedicated civilians are an integral component of our readiness, our warfighting team, and our overall defense of freedom here on the peninsula. We can’t do it without you,” LaCamera said. From the outstanding customer support to exemplary fiscal responsibility, the individuals are a credit to the warfighter, the Indo-Pacific mission and the Defense Logistics Agency. The recognition further solidifies warfighter trust in DLA and promotes organizational esprit de corps as a shared accomplishment. 

The annual civilian employee award is one of the highest individual honors the USFK commander can bestow upon DoD and Korean National civilians. The DLA awardees highlight the caliber of DLA Indo-Pacific personnel assigned along with their enduring support to the warfighter in the Republic of Korea and commitment to the Indo-Pacific mission. “There are more than 12,000 civilian employees performing a wide variety of important missions and tasks that support our joint force. Today, we honor some of them for their outstanding service on behalf of our nation and the ROK (Republic of Korea)-U.S. Alliance,” LaCamera said.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 86 (Thursday, May 3, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 26280]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10613]

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

FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL

[Docket No. AS12-09]

Appraisal Subcommittee Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions 
Examination Council.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

    Description: In accordance with Section 1104(b) of Title XI of the 
Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, 
as amended, notice is hereby given that the Appraisal Subcommittee 
(ASC) will meet in closed session:
    Location: OCC--250 E Street SW., Room 2C, Washington, DC 20219.
    Date: May 9, 2012.
    Time: Immediately following the ASC open session.
    Status: Closed.
    Matters to be Considered:
    April 11, 2012 minutes--Closed Session.
    Preliminary discussion of State Compliance Reviews.

    Dated: April 27, 2012.
James R. Park,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2012-10613 Filed 5-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6700-01-P
```
#### Mangan v. Safe Auto Ins. Co.

08/10/2016

126 WAL (2016)

Denied

Pa.Super., 135 A.3d 666
#### People v Bah

App Term, 1st Dept: 51 Misc 3d 146(A) (NY)

denied 8/1/16 (Rivera, J.)
No. 09-11390.

#### Jamal White, Petitioner v. John Evans, Warden.

562 U.S. 877, 131 S. Ct. 391,

178 L. Ed. 2d 114,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6820.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
2017-0412.

#### In re Application of Black Fork Wind Energy, L.L.C.

Power Siting Board, No. 10-8265-EL-BGN. On motion to dismiss of Ohio Power Siting Board. Motion denied. On motion to dismiss of Black Fork Wind Energy, L.L.C. Motion denied.
Exhibit 10.3


 


	
  FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

  	
  Contact: Angie Tickle

  
	
   

  	
  Investor Relations

  
	
   

  	
  770-395-4520

  



 


 


Georgia Gulf Announces Shutdown of Tiptonville Compound Facility


 


ATLANTA, November 29, 2004 – Georgia Gulf Corporation (NYSE: GGC)
announced today that it will shutdown its Tiptonville, Tennessee, compound
plant effective immediately as part of the Corporation’s ongoing commitment to
operational efficiency.


 


“We considered many factors, including the capital investment required
to ensure our competitiveness, in making this difficult decision.  Our desire now is to help our Tiptonville
employees and their families through this transition.  We appreciate the contributions made by these
employees,” said Bill Doherty, vice president, vinyl compounds.


 


Customers will see no change as a result of this plant closure due to
increased efficiencies from the other Georgia Gulf compound manufacturing
locations.


 


Georgia Gulf, headquartered in Atlanta, is a major manufacturer and
marketer of two integrated product lines, chlorovinyls and aromatics.  Georgia Gulf’s chlorovinyls products include
chlorine, caustic soda, vinyl chloride monomer and vinyl resins and
compounds.  Georgia Gulf’s primary
aromatic products include cumene, phenol and acetone.


 


This news release contains forward-looking statements subject to the “safe
harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995.  These forward-looking statements
are based on management’s assumptions regarding business conditions,
and actual results may be materially different. 
Risks and uncertainties inherent in these assumptions include, but are
not limited to, future global economic conditions, economic conditions in the
industries to which the company sells, industry production capacity, raw
material and energy costs and other factors discussed in the Securities and
Exchange Commission filings of Georgia Gulf Corporation, including our annual
report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 and our subsequent
reports on Form 10-Q.