alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# DLA to undergo DOD quadrennial review

/ Published June 27, 2023
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
A Defense Department-led review will assess whether the Defense Logistics Agency meets its chartered mission efficiently and effectively.

Title 10 of the U.S. Code requires such reviews be done every four years. The assessment will be conducted by DOD’s Office of the Director of Administration and Management with assistance from the recently formed Defense Management Institute.

DLA, ODA&M and DMI are developing the terms of reference, which will outline the review process and objectives. Focus areas are still being determined but may include contingency demand planning, depot-level reparables and warehouse utilization.

DLA Transformation will oversee the agency’s participation with some offices throughout DLA being asked to provide resources to fulfill requests for information and data, according to a June 26 memo from DLA Vice Director Brad Bunn announcing the review to senior leaders. A call for resources is expected soon, he added.

“I expect DLA leaders to get personally involved in all aspects of the review,” Bunn said. “As a professional organization, we will be honest, transparent, cooperative, and timely in our replies and requests for data.”

Overarching objectives of the review include looking for overlap of missions within DOD and identifying DLA contributions to the National Defense Strategy. The review will also measure organizational health and performance, as well as assess the agency’s contributions to DOD human resources business operations.

Bunn stressed in his memo that reviews aren’t new to DLA.

“As leaders, we welcome views of others in our quest for continuous improvement and to provide better support for the warfighter,” he said.
May 16, 2014

CAAP-11-0000343

#### Bismark Mortg. Co., LLC v. Pai

Dismissed
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

Richard P.  McStravick,  President and Chief Executive  Officer,  and Anthony J.
Fabiano,  Senior Vice  President  and Chief  Financial  Officer of Sound Federal
Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company"), each certify in his capacity as an officer of the
Company that he has reviewed  the  Quarterly  Report of the Company on Form 10-Q
for the  quarterly  period  ended  December 31, 2004 and that to the best of his
knowledge:

      (1)   the report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Sections 13(a)
            and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

The purpose of this  statement  is solely to comply  with Title 18,  Chapter 63,
Section  1350 of the United  States  Code,  as  amended  by  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Sound  Federal  Bancorp,  Inc. and will be retained by Sound Federal
Bancorp,  Inc. and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.

February 8, 2005               /s/ Richard P. McStravick
----------------               ------------------------------------------------
Date                           President and Chief Executive Officer

February 8, 2005               /s/ Anthony J. Fabiano
----------------               ------------------------------------------------
Date                           Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### In the Matter of Stevon H., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 318]

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Mary Bednar, J), entered on or about February 7, 2003, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and placed him with the Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding 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. The victim’s detailed testimony clearly established that appellant and his companions attacked the victim with intent to injure him and without any justification.

Appellant’s challenge to the form of the court’s finding is unpreserved *(see Matter of Tukayra W.,*309 AD2d 623 [2003]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court’s fact-finding order complied with the statutory requirements *(id.).*Concur— Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Williams and Lerner, JJ.
# Hispanic Heritage Month Employee Spotlight - Maurice Sanabria

/ Published Sept. 15, 2023
RICHMOND, Va., 
*National Hispanic Heritage Month is observed yearly from September 15 to October 15. It is a time to celebrate the achievements, histories, traditions, and cultural diversity of Hispanic Americans whose heritage is rooted in 20 Latin American countries and territories.*

*In observance of 2023’s Hispanic Heritage Month, Defense Logistics Agency Aviation will feature employees of Hispanic heritage**.*

**Name:**Maurice Sanabria

**Job title:**Chief

**Organization:**Command Support Directorate’s Command Programs Division

**How long have you worked for DLA?**19 years

**Please describe your job in a sentence or two.**My job is to oversee the day-to-day operations of the Command Programs Division. I lead a team of ten program analysts who manage a range of command-level programs, actions, products, and projects.

**How do you support the warfighter?**My team and I support the warfighter by the planning, execution, coordination, review, and completion of initiatives, actions, and projects related to programs needed to support DLA Aviation’s mission. These include policy management, support agreements, civilian awards, continuity of operations, task and action management, the employee suggestion program, and strategic planning. We manage the relationships of both internal and external stakeholders regarding assigned programs.

**This year’s theme for Hispanic Heritage Month is, “Todos Somos, Somos Uno – We Are All, We Are One." In your words, briefly explain what this means to you.**This year’s theme speaks about the diversity of the Latino community. We are often mentioned under an umbrella term such as “Latino,” however, we represent many countries, territories, cultures, and traditions.

**Tell us something unique about your heritage or country of origin.**I find the music of the Hispanic culture to be unique. I am from the western coast of the island of Puerto Rico, which is a territory of the United States. Puerto Rico is famous for being the birthplace of the Spanish urban musical rhythms such as Reggaetón. However, we are also the birthplace of two Afro-Puerto Rican musical expressions known as Bomba and Plena.

My father and I founded the Afro-Puerto Rican music band called Kadencia that is dedicated to playing, promoting, and preserving Bomba and Plena. It is our way of keeping this music alive and sharing our culture throughout the state and region.

**What is one thing you'd like others to know about your heritage?**I want people to know that Puerto Ricans have a rich cultural legacy in its music, cuisine, and language that includes elements from the Taino, African, and Spanish cultures.

**Why is it important to you that we celebrate Hispanic Heritage Month?** Hispanic Heritage Month is important to me because it highlights the contributions of Hispanic Americans to our nation. It is an opportunity to celebrate our diversity and the many great things that we bring to the table.
Exhibit 15.13




CONSENT




We hereby consent to the reference to our “Fair value estimation of financial instrument given to Elbit Imaging Ltd. and by Elbit Imaging Ltd. to Park Plaza Netherlands" as of 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
# 7 Pickering

J. Parraguirre

Saitta 

### J. Accordingly, having considered the petition and the supporting documentation, we conclude that Burris's offense does not warrant the imposition of a temporary suspension or referral to the disciplinary board at this time.

It is so ORDERED.

cc: David A. Clark, Bar Counsel State Bar of Nevada/Las Vegas Law Office of Betsy Allen

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A 

### ea
#### In the Matter of Romeo J., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[65 NYS3d 455]

Appeals from orders of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or about April 19, 2017, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon his admissions that he committed acts that, if committed by an *531adult, would constitute the crimes of grand larceny in the fourth degree, aggravated harassment in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and placed him with the Administration for Children’s Services’ Close to Home program for a period of 12 months, unanimously dismissed as moot, without costs.

These appeals challenging dispositional orders, but not the underlying juvenile delinquency adjudications, are moot because appellant has also been placed with the Close to Home program under another dispositional order, from which he has not taken an appeal. Therefore, the placement would remain the same regardless of the outcome of these appeals *(see People ex rel. Bourlaye T. v Connolly,*25 NY3d 1054 [2015]).

In any event, we find defendant’s challenges to the disposi-tional orders unavailing.

Concur—Gische, J.P., Webber, Oing, Singh and Moulton, JJ.
June 26, 2015

Mr. David Twining Chief Operating Officer Planck Aerosystems Inc. 3106 Maple Street San Diego, CA 92014

Dear Mr. Twining:

This letter is to inform you that we are unabl e to process your request for an exemption from §§ 45.23, 45.27, 45.29, 91.119, 91.121, 91.151, 91.405, 91.407, 91.409, 91.417, and part 21 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CF R). It explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Cannot Process Your Request

We entered your April 21, 2015, exemption request on behalf of Planck Aerosystems Inc. into the public docket (No. FAA

− 2015

− 1479), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any fu rther, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requi res you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days , we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additiona l time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Thomas Tunstall, Appellant.

[630 NYS2d 790]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Mackston, J.), rendered June 30, 1992, convicting him of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree (two counts), failure to report an accident, and leaving the scene of an incident without reporting, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the sentences imposed upon the convictions for obstructing governmental administration in the second degree (two counts) and leaving the scene of an incident without reporting, are vacated, those counts of the indictment are dismissed, and a new trial is ordered on that count of the indictment charging the defendant with failure to report an accident.

The People conceded at oral argument that the two counts of obstructing governmental administration must be dismissed. The count charging the defendant with leaving the scene of an incident without reporting must also be dismissed *(see, People v Mullady,*178 AD2d 614).

The trial court improperly precluded defense counsel from questioning defense witnesses as to the defendant’s reputation for honesty. Under the circumstances of this case, we cannot conclude that such error was harmless and, accordingly, we order a new trial with respect to the failure to report an accident count. Rosenblatt, J. P., Copertino, Hart and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1


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


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A2 of Bioenvision, Inc. (the
"Company") for the year ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Christopher B. Wood,
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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.





                                /s/ Christopher B. Wood
                                ------------------------------------
                                Christopher B. Wood
                                Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                May 24, 2004
No. 10-5537.

#### Shawn A. Johnson, Petitioner v. James Basinger.

562 U.S. 927, 131 S. Ct. 315,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7569.

178 L. Ed. 2d 205,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
No. 09-11044.

#### Xiao Qing Liu, Petitioner v. Richline Group, et al.

562 U.S. 860, 131 S. Ct. 134,

178 L. Ed. 2d 81,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 5957,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of New York denied.

Same case below, 13 N.Y.3d 880, 893 N.Y.S.2d 831, 921 N.E.2d 598.
No. 09-11260.

#### Billy Eugene Hodges, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 870, 131 S. Ct. 169,

178 L. Ed. 2d 101,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6784.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 369 Fed. Appx. 586.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 15 (Friday, January 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 3593]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1570]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Special Emphasis Panel in Mathematical Sciences; Notice of 
Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Mathematical Sciences (1204).
    Date and Time: February 12-14, 1998.
    Place: Room 1020, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson 
Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: John Strikwerda, Computational Mathematics 
Program, Program Officer, Room 1025, National Science Foundation, 
4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Telephone: (703) 306-
1870.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning applications submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate proposals in the mathematics of 
fluids as part of the selection process for awards.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. 
These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (4) and (6) of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: January 16, 1998.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 98-1570 Filed 1-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
Docket Number FAA-2013-0466
No. 10-5034.

#### Brian K. Hines, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 900, 131 S. Ct. 231,

178 L. Ed. 2d 153,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6384.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
No. 10-5848.

#### Urian R. Sturgis, Sr., Petitioner v. Karen Hayes, et al.

562 U.S. 939, 131 S. Ct. 352,

178 L. Ed. 2d 228,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7353.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 374 Fed. Appx. 620.
#### J. Christopher Flowers, Appellant, v 73rd Townhouse LLC et al., Respondents.

[52 NYS3d 81]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Nancy Bannon, J.), entered October 15, 2014, which denied plaintiff’s motion *421for leave to amend the second amended complaint, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to grant the motion except as to beneficiary liability (part of proposed new count XVI), and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs.

Defendants failed to show that they would be prejudiced by the amendment *(see*CPLR 3025 [b]; *Cherebin v Empress Ambulance Serv., Inc.,*43 AD3d 364, 365 [1st Dept 2007]). Mere delay is not a sufficient basis on which to deny amendment *(Cherebin,*43 AD3d at 365). Defendants’ argument that plaintiff’s new theory is surprising and will require further discovery is unavailing. The amendment is based on evidence learned during discovery *(see Cherebin,*43 AD3d at 365). In any event, the need for additional discovery does not justify denying amendment *(Jacobson v McNeil Consumer & Specialty Pharms.,*68 AD3d 652, 654 [1st Dept 2009]), especially in light of defendants’ belated discovery responses *{see Briarpatch Ltd., L.P. v Briarpatch Film Corp.,*60 AD3d 585 [1st Dept 2009]).

The proposed third amended complaint states a claim against defendant executors of defendant estate of Milton S. Rinzler, but not against its beneficiaries *{see*EPTL 1-2.13, 11-4.7 [b]; *Matter of Rothko,*43 NY2d 305, 318 n 2 [1977]; *In re Ledyard’s Estate,*21 NYS2d 860, 885, 889 [Sur Ct, Nassau County 1939], *affd*259 App Div 892 [2d Dept 1940]).

It also states a claim to hold Milton Rinzler liable for the actions of defendant Dominion Management Company LLC because Dominion was an unregistered doing business as under which Rinzler conducted business *(see Apparel Corp. [Far E.] v Sheermax LLC,*126 AD3d 413 [1st Dept 2015], *lv denied*26 NY3d 905 [2015]). The doctrine of piercing the corporate veil applies to limited liability companies *[Matias v Mondo Props. LLC,*43 AD3d 367, 368 [1st Dept 2007]), and the proposed third amended complaint states a claim for piercing the corporate veil *{see Cortlandt St. Recovery Corp. v Hellas Telecom., S.A.R.L.,*142 AD3d 833, 834 [1st Dept 2016]; *2406-12 Amsterdam Assoc. LLC v Alianza LLC,*136 AD3d 512 [1st Dept 2016]; *Shisgal v Brown,*21 AD3d 845, 848-849 [1st Dept 2005]; *Chase Manhattan Bank [N.A.] v 264 Water St. Assoc.,*174 AD2d 504 [1st Dept 1991]).

Except for beneficiary liability, defendants failed to overcome the presumption of validity in plaintiff’s favor *(see Daniels v Empire-Orr, Inc.,*151 AD2d 370, 371 [1st Dept 1989]).

Concur— Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 116 (Wednesday, June 17, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 33097]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16124]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-295/304-LA, ASLBP No. 98-744-04-LA]


Commonwealth Edison Company; Establishment of Atomic Safety and 
Licensing Board

    Pursuant to delegation by the Commission dated December 29, 1972, 
published in the Federal Register, 37 F.R. 28710 (1972), and Sections 
2.105, 2.700, 2.702, 2.714, 2.714a, 2.717, 2.721 of the Commission's 
Regulations, all as amended, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board is 
being established to preside over the following proceeding.

Commonwealth Edison Company

Zion Nuclear Power Station

    This Board is being established pursuant to a petition to intervene 
submitted by Edwin D. Dienethal. The petition was filed in response to 
a notice of a proposed determination that the issuance of a license 
amendment to the Commonwealth Edison Company for the Zion Nuclear Power 
Station would involve no significant hazards considerations. The 
license amendment would make several technical specification changes, 
reinstate license conditions that were deleted by a previous amendment 
and modify staffing requirements and management titles to reflect a 
shutdown status. The notice was published in the Federal Register at 63 
FR 25101, 25105 (May 6, 1998).
    The Board is comprised of the following administrative judges:

Thomas S. Moore, Chairman, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555.
Dr. Jerry R. Kline, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555.
Frederick J. Shon, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555.

    All correspondence, documents and other materials shall be filed 
with the Judges in accordance with 10 C.F.R. 2.701.

    Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of June 1998.
B. Paul Cotter, Jr.,
 Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel.
[FR Doc. 98-16124 Filed 6-16-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
# DLA Troop Support commences Senior Leader Strategic Planning session

/ Published April 19, 2023
PHILADELPHIA, 
Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support kicked off a two-day Senior Leader Strategic Planning Session today in Philadelphia. The event began with McKinsey & Company, a New York-based global management consulting firm, presenting about industry trends and market conditions followed by an interactive discussion on growing business. Breakout discussions were also held on the topics of: emotional intelligence; and understanding and managing conflict.
2017-1783.

#### Valdez v. Eppinger.

In Habeas Corpus. Sua sponte, cause dismissed.

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

O’Neill, J., not participating.