alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# 2023 DLA Hall of Fame inductee: David Falvey

/ Published May 15, 2023
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
*Editor’s Note: This is one of six stories featuring 2023 DLA Hall of Fame inductees. An induction ceremony will be held 2 p.m. May 18 at the McNamara Headquarters Complex auditorium at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. The ceremony is open to all DLA employees; invitations are not needed.*

The man who led the development and implementation of the Defense Logistics Agency’s online business infrastructure is a member of the 2023 DLA Hall of Fame.

As the first program manager for Business Systems Modernization in 1998-99, David Falvey played a lead role in redefining DLA’s logistics systems. DLA then depended on aging and often homegrown legacy systems that, though still functional, had declining reliability.

Falvey understood the growing need for efficiency and responsiveness in business systems that supported $40 billion in acquisitions annually. He helped design a modern IT framework that enabled DLA to expand its global logistics mission in support of the Defense Department and other federal agencies. He then worked with Pentagon officials to gain approval for what became a $750 million program lasting over seven years.

“His mastery of the [Defense Department] acquisition process and ability to develop successful working relationships across DOD were instrumental in laying the foundation for DLA’s successful transformation,” according to his nomination.

Falvey was selected for Senior Executive Service in 2001 and served as DLA’s first Program Executive Officer until June 2008, as he continued modernizing the agency’s logistics systems and then oversaw fielding in December 2006. BSM became DOD’s largest online business system implementation to date and was hailed as the model for others. The achievement earned him recognition as a Presidential Rank of Meritorious Executive in 2007.

The nomination described Falvey’s 12-year role at DLA as intensely challenging.

“Mr. Falvey led all of the agency’s transformational modernization programs that were recognized throughout DOD as delivering the necessary software and embedded business process enhancements for the agency to continuously improve supply chain support to its customers,” the nomination continued.

He also led what was then a global 3,000-person IT workforce that provided network, infrastructure and telecommunications support, as well as software development and maintenance of DLA’s IT enterprise.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO . A

- 4475

- 18T2

LEVINE DESANTIS, LLC,

a New Jersey Limited Liability

Company,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

LAURIE GALITSIS, Executrix of the

the Estate of Nicholas Bovino, and

LAURIE GALITSIS, an Individual,

Defendants

- Respondents.

Submitted May 7 , 2020

– Decided May 20, 2020

Before Judges Alvarez and Suter.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law

Division, Bergen County, Docket No. L

- 1163

- 18.

Levine DeSantis, LLC, appellant pro se (Peter Nichols,

on the briefs).

Beattie Padovano, LLC, attorneys for respondents

(James V. Zarr illo, of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court

. " A lthough it is posted on the

internet

, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited

. R

. 1:36

- 3.2 A

- 4475

- 18T2

The matter having been amicably settled by the parties, it is hereby

ordered that the appeal is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
No. 10-5662.

#### Vernell A. Brown, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 933, 131 S. Ct. 333,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7479.

178 L. Ed. 2d 217,

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 383 Fed. Appx. 543.
No. 10-5386.

#### Michael Curtis Reynolds, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 918, 131 S. Ct. 289,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7524,

178 L. Ed. 2d 189,

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 374 Fed. Appx. 356.
2016-1868.

#### Trumbull Cty. Bar Assn. v. Bellew.

Sua sponte, Timothy Eric Bellew, Attorney Registration No. 0067573, last known business address in Girard, Ohio, found in contempt for failure to file an affidavit of compliance on or before February 23, 2017.
#### 50 Gramercy Park North Owners Corp., Appellant, v GPH Partners LLC (Sponsor) et al., Respondents. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[50 NYS3d 870]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered June 13, 2016, which denied plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on the first, eighth through tenth, twelfth through seventeenth, and twenty-third causes of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants’ denials in their answer were not improper and do not entitle plaintiff to summary judgment. Further, insofar as plaintiff relied on affidavits and documentary evidence in support of its motion, given the early stage of discovery, Supreme Court did not err in denying summary judgment as premature *(see*CPLR 3212 [f]).

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Richter, Feinman, Gische and Gesmer, JJ.
No. 10-5440.

#### Hipolito Garcia-Montano, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 922, 131 S. Ct. 299,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7312.

178 L. Ed. 2d 195,

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 373 Fed. Appx. 509.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Joseph Fiegoli, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 592]

—Judgment, Supreme *277Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.), rendered January 30, 1997, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of conspiracy in the fifth degree (two counts), bribing a labor official (two counts) and knowingly participating in a specific prohibited financial interest and transaction in violation of Labor Law § 723 (1) (d), §§ 724 and 725 (4), and sentencing him to five years probation with an aggregate fine of $6,500 and 200 hours of community service, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility *(see People v Gaimari,*176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). The credible evidence, along with reasonable inferences that may be drawn therefrom, established each element of the crimes of which defendant was convicted, and also established that defendant’s conduct was voluntary and was not the product of extortion or coercion *(see*Penal Law § 180.20). We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Lerner and Marlow, JJ.
#### Hueitt v. Philadelphia Media Holdings, LLC; Philadelphia Media Holdings, LLc, In re

04/04/2016

591 EAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 125 A.3d 448
#### Scott, Matter of, v Leverett

1st Dept: 144 AD3d 614

denied
No. 09-11495.

#### Felipe Carrasco-Rivera, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 884, 131 S. Ct. 209,

178 L. Ed. 2d 126,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6635.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 348 Fed. Appx. 308.
[Cite as Goad v. Dept. of Rehab. & Corr. , 2011-Ohio-2739.] 

# Court of Claims of Ohio

The Ohio Judicial Center 65 South Front Street, Third Floor Columbus, OH 43215 614.387.9800 or 1.800.824.8263 www.cco.state.oh.us

RONNIE GOAD

Plaintiff

v.

DEPARTMENT OF REHABILITATION AND CORRECTION

Defendant

Case No. 2010-10556-AD

Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert

ENTRY OF DISMISSAL

{¶ 1} On September 15, 2010, plaintiff filed this action against defendant, Department of Rehabilitation and Correction (DRC), alleging his pe rsonal property was lost or stolen as a result of negligence on the part of DRC staff. On November 17, 2010, defendant filed an investigation report, stating on October 28, 2010, plaintiff signed a full and final release of the claim against defendant in consideration for $ 60.00. Thus defendant requests that the court dismiss plaintiff’s claim in its entirety. Plaintiff did not respond to defendant's investigation report. {¶ 2} The release in pertinent part states: {¶ 3} "The undersigned inmate does hereby release, hold harmless from any liability and forever discharge the State of Ohio and the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, their offices, employees, and agents, personally or in any capacity, from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, costs, expenses, and any and all other damages, which the undersigned inmate ever had, now has, or in the future may have, or claim to have, against the State of Ohio or the Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, their office rs, employees, and agents for loss of orCase No. 2010-10556-AD - 2 - ENTRY

damage to property arising out of the following incident: Art Supplies-Reference Case

NO. 2010-10556 AD.” {¶ 4} Upon review, the signing of the release by plaintiff constitutes the voluntary dismissal of his case against defendant. Accordingly, plaintiff's case is

DISMISSED. The court shall absorb the court costs for this claim. The clerk shall serve upon all parties notice of the entry of dismissal and its date of entry upon the journal.

________________________________ DANIEL R. BORCHERT Deputy Clerk

Entry cc:

Ronnie Goad, #579-459 Gregory C. Trout, Chief Counsel 5900 B.I.S. Road Department of Rehabilitation Lancaster, Ohio 43130 and Correction 770 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43222 SJM/laa 3/7 Filed 3/10/11 Sent to S.C. reporter 5/27/11
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-22-00125-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 442nd District Court

Denton County, Texas

Trial Court No. 21-5296-442

Before Walker, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Kerr, J.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

IN THE INTEREST OF S.T., A CHILD
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

We have considered appellant’s “Motion in Request to Voluntary Dismiss 

Appeal.” We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 

43.2(f).

Per Curiam

Delivered: September 22, 2022
Exhibit 10.3


 


FIVE STAR QUALITY CARE, INC.


 


Summary of Director Compensation


 


The following is a summary of the currently effective compensation of the directors of Five Star Quality Care, Inc. (the “Company”) for services as directors, which is subject to modification at any time by the Board of Directors.



	
             
 	
            •
 	
            Each independent director receives an annual fee of $25,000, plus a fee of $500 for each meeting attended.  Up to two $500 fees are payable if a board meeting and one or more board committee meetings are held on the same date.
 





	
             
 	
            •
 	
            The chairpersons of the quality of care committee, the audit committee, the compensation committee and the nominating and governance committee, each of whom is an independent director, receive an additional annual fee of $12,500, $7,500, $3,500 and $3,500, respectively.
 





	
             
 	
            •
 	
            Each director is entitled to receive a grant of 4,000 of the Company’s shares of common stock on the date of the first board meeting following each annual meeting of shareholders (or, for directors who are first elected or appointed at other times, on the day of the first board meeting attended).
 





	
             
 	
            •
 	
            The Company generally reimburses all directors for travel expenses incurred in connection with their duties as directors.
#### Garcia, Matter of, v Morris

3d Dept: 140 AD3d 1441

denied
## ~ECrE~VED**~N**

_________ -7_,___- 

### L 2**~** 

### Is· COURT OJ: r.Ril\JJINAf i\PPEALS



### . JUt 1-;**2~i5**

. '
.

___**[)__~ ~**  r. )11 / 

### /-1 C_i:;-5**-/'-~** --:·:-:-·-'_·
________ _,_____ ___ ...:____.

## --~--------~---------·-L~~·;,~·~~o-·~.~~·**~7~·-~~~~=·~~~.~e~·~/~J----~**_ _._/l't-_3_t:adr / 

# f)**;;21-c~.>_e.** . 

## lL t/v r c._. 5 £.r S

### ~ 6 ;"1. 

### c -e._ ?v/ I 

## J**-~ rc.~**  

## f 7;;_ · CA. 

### -f2-;:2/ 

### ec, h 

## k d. / r1 

### -fA 

### ,j /"'lit 

### --1--fr,.---**..5~** ;rzc

### e/~**~'--------­** .t;...._?p;;: 2;. lh 7- 1'2.-()_.



## ____**Qfe~~ Y~5~hC~~--~~~'------------------------~--**  

## J1 f\J 

## Tw ,4; r:J 

# J ,4 

### 1- WI 

### J4**/!-,--=---__!_~~() i~3~·o..:__vv__!_('-=g-=-~~Lfc__!Cf~&:__?...**  ________ _



## ___ ·**-~EEL£~0-~~v~~~~~l_. -------~------~--­**  

### l**~~** 

### ( · 

## E Mr 'l.O)_C-f'---.**--------------~-'---­**

___ /__ErJtVESjf_E CaL6/'-JV__, T.J

### 75KZ___,·--~---------



### ...**:~-~----------------~-----~-~--** 1
I I.**i----------~~-~------~-~~~-~--.~-~--** 1-·

## -------------------~--------- 1
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 20-F of Elbit Systems Ltd. (the Company)
for the year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Joseph Ackerman,
Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) of the Company, certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to sec. 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, as amended; 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: June 14, 2007

| |                                                                        
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ Joseph Ackerman____________________________________
Joseph Ackerman
| | Chief Executive Officer                                                
| | (Principal Executive Officer)
No. 10-5223.

#### Sean Darrell Johnson, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 910, 131 S. Ct. 260,

178 L. Ed. 2d 173,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7113.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 380 Fed. Appx. 290.
#### Prioleau, Matter of, v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal

1st Dept: 141 AD3d 439

denied
EXHIBIT 31.2
RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Sheldon C. Fenton certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of VeridienCorporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the smallbusiness issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the smallbusiness issuer and have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the smallbusiness issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during the periodin which this report is being prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during thesmall business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small businessissuer’s fourth physical quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.
5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the auditcommittee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent functions):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal controls over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the smallbusiness issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and
 

 

     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: May 14, 2004                /s/ Sheldon C. Fenton   Sheldon C. Fenton         Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 115 (Tuesday, June 16, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 32809]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15861]

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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Montana Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of 
the Montana Advisory Committee to the Commission will convene at 1:00 
p.m. and adjourn at 4:00 p.m. on August 4, 1998, at the Days Inn, 1321 
North 7th Avenue, Bozeman, Montana 59715. The purpose of the meeting is 
to provide orientation for new Advisory Committee members and discuss 
the summary on Indian education issues.
    Persons desiring additional information, or planning a presentation 
to the Committee, should contact John Dulles, Director of the Rocky 
Mountain Regional Office, 303-866-1040 (TDD 303-866-1049). Hearing-
impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services 
of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at 
least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of the 
rules and regulations of the Commission.

    Dated at Washington, DC, June 8, 1998.
Carol-Lee Hurley,
Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 98-15861 Filed 6-15-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
<Page>

Exhibit 12
Questar Gas Company
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
(Unaudited)

<Table>
<Caption>
                                                12 Months Ended
                                                  September 30,
                                              2001         2000
                                             -------      -------
                                             (Dollars in Thousands)
<S>                                          <C>          <C>
Earnings
Income before income taxes                   $43,077      $25,656
Plus debt expense                             23,341       21,106
Plus allowance for borrowed
   funds used during construction                807          221
Plus interest portion of rental expense          772          666
                                             -------      -------
                                             $67,997      $47,649
                                             =======      =======
Fixed Charges
Debt expense                                 $23,341      $21,106
Plus allowance for borrowed
   funds used during construction                807          221
Plus interest portion of rental expense          772          666
                                             -------      -------
                                             $24,920      $21,993
                                             =======      =======
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges (1)          2.73         2.17
</Table>

(1)  For the purposes of this presentation, earnings represent income before
income taxes and fixed charges. Fixed charges consist of total interest charges,
amortization of debt issuance costs and losses from reacquiring debt, and the
interest portion of rental costs, estimated at 50% for the purpose of this
calculation.
2017-0692.

#### May v. Dir., Dept. of Job & Family Servs.

In Mandamus. On respondents’ motions to dismiss. Motions granted. Cause dismissed. On relators’ motion to amend complaint and join respondent. Motion denied.

O’Connor, C.J., and O’Neill, Fischer, and DeWine, JJ., concur.

O’Donnell, J., dissents and would deny the motions to dismiss, grant the motion to amend complaint and join respondent, and grant an alternative writ.

Kennedy and French, JJ., dissent in part and would grant relators’ motion to amend complaint and join respondent and would order joined respondent to file an answer to the amended complaint or a motion to dismiss within 21 days of the filing of the complaint.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 21-346

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

WILLIAM DEAN GRUSSING,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER 

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

good cause appearing therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of 

time to and including September 24, 2021, within which to prepare, file, and 

serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

August 24 2021

08/24/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0346
160 A.3d 712

#### PETRO-LUBRICANT TESTING LABORATORIES, INC., AND JOHN WINTERMUTE, PLAINTIFFS-CROSS-RESPONDENTS, v. ASHER ADELMAN, D/B/A EBOSSWATCH.COM, DEFENDANT-CROSS-PETITIONER.

February 13, 2017

ON CROSS PETITION FOR CERTIFICATION

To the Appellate Division, Superior Court:

A cross-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 cross-petition for certification is denied, with costs.
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.3


                WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

         Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. "1350, I, the
undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Pierre Foods, Inc. (the "Company"),
hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of
the Company for the quarter ended August 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.




Pamela M. Witters
October 15, 2002