alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# DLA Aviation at Oklahoma City welcomes improvements

/ Published April 17, 2023
Richmond, Va., 
The Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management team celebrated the opening of a new office administration area Mar. 6 in Bldg. 2121 on Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma. The section had not been updated in more than 45 years, and it now boasts brighter, modern looks with essential equipment for day-to-day operations.

Samuel “Carl” Eggleston, chief of the Material Management Division within DLA Aviation at Oklahoma City, said the renovations in Bldg. 2121 and Bldg. 9001 are a reflection of the organization’s motto: "I promise to take care of our people so they can take care of our customers."

Eggleston said upkeep, upgrades and additions are often long endeavors, but thanks to the dedication of employees like Facility Operations Specialist Doug Moore and Management Analyst April Walker, major projects are coming to fruition on an expedited timeline.

Moore noted that Building 2121 renovations began in August 2021, and the work was not without its obstacles.

"We had significant challenges, to include supply chain issues, asbestos-containing floor tile mastic, and water intrusion due to a collapsing roof drain," Moore said.

Despite the hiccups, the facility now boasts a more open floor plan where employees are no longer separated from one another.

Because the building was originally an unconditioned facility, Moore said a new heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system was installed to accommodate weather extremes. Renovations also include a new type of flooring material that will be used as a model for future renovations.

The celebration of facility upgrades continued Apr. 10 with a ribbon cutting for additional restroom facilities in Building 9001, the former GM plant. Eggleston said the facility supports every Maintenance Group on Tinker; 109 employees work here.

"This is a significant quality of life project due to the nearest restroom for our employees being approximately one-eighth of a mile away," Moore explained. The new restrooms double current capacity, and they will be available immediately following the ribbon cutting.

Eggleston added, "It has taken effort, patience and plain old grit from all of our employees to see these projects through. The end result will improve our people's quality of life for years to come."
No. 09-11374.

#### Kent Frank, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 876, 131 S. Ct. 186,

178 L. Ed. 2d 112,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6874.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 599 F.3d 1221.
# Fire Prevention Week focuses on safety during pandemic conditions

/ Published Oct. 2, 2020
COLUMBUS, Ohio, 
Fire Prevention Week is observed nationally during October 4-10. This year’s Fire Prevention Week campaign, "Serve Up Fire Safety in the Kitchen!" works to educate everyone about the simple but important actions they can take to keep themselves and those around them safe.

While more people have been staying home during this pandemic, the potential for fires has also increased. Understanding this potential is more important now than ever. The likelihood of walking away from a stove in operation increases when we become complacent in our daily routine at home.

Expanding on this year’s Fire Prevention Week campaign, other concerns need addressing during this pandemic. Not only has the likelihood of cooking dangers increased, but so has the danger associated with an increased use of electrical equipment around the house.

The recent heatwaves across the country have caused a rise in the use of AC units running. And when the fall and winter months arrive, these units will transfer into heating and if they are not appropriately maintained the potential for fires increase. Many HVAC companies recommend twice-a-year checkups of your air conditioning and heating units by early spring and early fall to get them ready for the changing seasons.

Households with a lot of kids or adults may see an increase in overloaded or overused electrical outlets. Spread the devices around the house to ensure outlets are not overloaded or overused. Check outlets and cords for loose connections that can develop from plugging and unplugging devices.

It wouldn't be fire prevention week if we don't mention checking home smoke alarms. Place smoke alarms on every home level, in each bedroom, and near all sleeping areas. Test smoke alarms monthly. The pandemic is forcing social distancing; rethink your meeting points if you must leave the house due to a fire.
No. 10-5338.

#### Leroy Hefley, Petitioner v. Delaware.

562 U.S. 916, 131 S. Ct. 279,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7063,

178 L. Ed. 2d 184,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Delaware denied.

Same case below, 986 A.2d 1164.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
CONDENSED  STATEMENT OF INCOME  (UNAUDITED) FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 2000 AND CONDENSED BALANCE SHEET (UNAUDITED) AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           6,177
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,604
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (741)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                25,349
<PP&E>                                          11,751
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,643)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 193,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           28,790
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           126
<OTHER-SE>                                     104,197
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   193,400
<SALES>                                         34,645
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                34,645
<CGS>                                           11,757
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   31,565
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,485
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,673
<INCOME-TAX>                                       514
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,159
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,159
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.11




</TABLE>
(June 7, 2017)

#### Alumil Fabrication, Inc., Appellant, v F.A. Alpine Window Manufacturing Corporation, Respondent.

[53 NYS3d 554]

In an action, inter alia, for replevin and to recover damages for conversion, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Slobod, J.), dated March 24, 2016, which, in effect, granted the defendant’s motion to compel the deposition of a nonparty witness and denied its cross motion for a protective order preventing the defendant from obtaining discovery from the nonparty witness.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

CPLR 3101 (a) is to be liberally construed “to require disclosure, upon request, of any facts bearing on the controversy which will assist preparation for trial by sharpening the issues and reducing delay and prolixity” *(Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co.,*21 NY2d 403, 406 [1968]; *see Matter of Kapon v Koch,*23 NY3d 32, 38 [2014]). Here, in order to compel a deposition, the defendant was required to show that the disclosure sought was “material and necessary” (CPLR 3101 [a]; *see Matter of Kapon v Koch,*23 NY3d at 38). In addition, since the defendant was seeking disclosure from the plaintiff’s counsel as a nonparty witness, the defendant was required to provide notice of the *668“circumstances or reasons” why the disclosure was “sought or required” from the nonparty witness (CPLR 3101 [a] [4]; *see Matter of Kapon v Koch,*23 NY3d at 39; *Reid v Soults,*138 AD3d 1091, 1092 [2016]; *Bianchi v Galster Mgt. Corp.,*131 AD3d 558, 559 [2015]; *Dicenso v Wallin,*109 AD3d 508, 509 [2013]).

The defendant satisfied the notice requirement by serving the plaintiffs counsel with its motion papers, which properly provided the circumstances or reasons requiring the deposition of that nonparty *(see*CPLR 3101 [a] [4]). Furthermore, the defendant demonstrated that the deposition testimony was relevant to the defense of the action and to the prosecution of its counterclaim (see *Clean Earth of N. Jersey, Inc. v Northcoast Maintenance Corp.,*142 AD3d 1032, 1035 [2016]; *Branch Servs., Inc. v Cooper,*102 AD3d 645, 646 [2013]; *BRK Props., Inc. v Wagner Ziv Plumbing & Heating Corp.,*89 AD3d 883, 884 [2011]). In opposition to the defendant’s motion and in support of its cross motion for a protective order, the plaintiff failed to establish that the deposition testimony sought was irrevelant to this action.

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion when it, in effect, granted the defendant’s motion to compel the deposition of the nonparty witness and denied, the plaintiff’s cross motion for a protective order.

Hall, J.P., Sgroi, Maltese and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
# C_2014093EN.01002901.xml

| 29.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/29

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 13 February 2014 — Moës v Commission

(Case F-20/13) (1)

1

2014/C 93/50

Language of the case: French

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 114, 20.4.2013, p. 48.

1

---
DLA Aviation at Warner Robins employees Spring into fun
 
  By Natalie Skelton, DLA Aviation Public Affairs
  After nearly four years, employees with Defense Logistics Agency Aviation at Warner Robins leapt at the opportunity to enjoy springtime fun on a grand scale during the spring fling event May 19 at Robins Park on Robins Air Force Base, Georgia. The event was planned and hosted by the command’s Just Plane Fun Committee, and featured food, entertainment and family-friendly games and activities. "This year’s spring fling was the first major gathering since the holiday party in December of 2019, said Steven Soisson, deputy commander, DLA Aviation at Warner Robins. “The objective of DLA Aviation at Warner Robins’ Just Plane Fun committee is to boost employee morale, promote positive improvements in the workplace culture, and support milestones and accomplishments that unite the team,” said DLA Aviation at Warner Robins Commander Air Force Colonel Brian Mayer. Preparation and promotion began months in advance with fundraisers such as lucky turkey giveaway, Valentine’s candy grams, and jersey day. More than 150 employees turned out to support the spring fling and participated in basketball, inflatable axe throwing, horseshoes and board games. Soisson thanked all the volunteers who dedicated countless hours to preparation and execution of the event. He said, “they had a hand in making the event a success.” Colonel Mayer stated, “It was great to see people smiling, learning more about each other, and participating in games, building the bonds that strengthens our team and make us more effective in supplying aircraft readiness for the Air Force.”
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-7776

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus VANCE LAMONT CHRISTIAN, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District Judge; Frederic N. Smalkin, Senior District Judge. (CR-01-10-S) Submitted: June 30, 2003 Decided: July 25, 2003 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Vance Lamont Christian, Appellant Pro Se. James Gerard Pyne, Assistant United States Attorney, Albert David Copperthite, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Effective Dec ember 1, 2002, Rule 26 was revised to exclude “intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays” when the time period is less than eleven days. Previously, weekends and holidays generally were excluded only when the time period was less than seven days.
2 PER CURIAM: Vance Lamont Christian seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to correct his sentence under Fed. R. Crim. P. 35(b). In criminal cases, the defendant must file his notice of appeal within ten days of the entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A); seeUnited States v. Breit , 754 F.2d 526, 528 (4th Cir. 1985) (applying ten-day appeal period to Rule 35 motion). With or without a motion, the district court may grant an extension of time of up to thirty days upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4); United States v. Reyes , 759 F.2d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 1985). The district court entered its order denying the motion for reduction of sentence on October 15, 2002; the ten-day appeal period expired on October 25, 2002. See Fed. R. App. P. 26. * Christian filed his notice of appeal after the ten-day period expired but within the thirty-day excusable neglect period. Because the notice of appeal was filed within the excusable neglect period, we remanded the case to the district court for a determination of whether Christian demonstrated excusable neglect or good cause warranting an extension of the ten-day appeal period. The district3 court concluded that Christian failed to demonstrate excusable neglect or good cause and we find no abuse of discretion. Breit , 754 F.2d at 528 (providing standard of review). Because he failed to timely file an appeal or obtain an extension for filing an appeal, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Christian’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is denied. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court.

DISMISSED
No. 10-5233.

#### Hares Ajmal Ahmadzai, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 953, 131 S. Ct. 262,

178 L. Ed. 2d 252,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7780,

October 4, 2010.

Motion of petitioner to defer consideration of the petition for writ of certiorari denied. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 365 Fed. Appx. 871.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 15 (Friday, January 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 3612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-1614]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Declaration of Disaster #3047]


State of California

    Orange County and the contiguous Counties of Los Angeles, 
Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego in the State of California 
constitute a disaster area as a result of damages caused by flooding 
and mudslides which occurred on December 6, 1997. Applications for 
loans for physical damages may be filed until the close of business on 
March 13, 1998 and for economic injury until the close of business on 
October 12, 1998 at the address listed below or other locally announced 
locations: Small Business Administration, Disaster Area 4 Office, P.O. 
Box 13795, Sacramento, CA 95853-4795.
    The interest rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For physical damage:                                                    
  Homeowners with credit available elsewhere..................     7.625
  Homeowners without credit available elsewhere...............     3.812
  Businesses with credit available elsewhere..................     8.000
  Businesses and non-profit organizations without credit                
   available elsewhere........................................     4.000
  Others (including non-profit organizations) with credit               
   available elsewhere........................................     7.125
For economic injury:                                                    
  Businesses and small agricultural cooperatives without                
   credit available elsewhere.................................     4.000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 304706 
and for economic injury the number is 971400.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 
59008)

    Dated: January 12, 1998.
Aida Alvarez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-1614 Filed 1-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
**Exhibit 12.1**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Peter A. J. Gardiner, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Zindart Limited;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, 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 company asof, and for, the periods presented in this report;
     4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries,is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosurecontrols 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 reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the company’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theperiod covered by the annual report that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
     5. The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to thecompany’s auditors and the audit committee of the company’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent function):
 a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses inthe design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect thecompany’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in thecompany’s internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ Peter A. J. Gardiner
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 120 (Tuesday, June 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 34190]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16592]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Care Financing Administration

Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of 
Authority

    Part F, of the Statement of Organization, Functions, and 
Delegations of Authority of the Department of Health and Human 
Services, Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), 49 FR 34247, 
dated September 6, 1984, is amended to include the following delegation 
of authority from the Secretary to the Administrator, HCFA, for 
carrying out Title XXVII, of the Public Health Service Act, as amended.
     Section F.30., Delegations of Authority is amended by 
adding the following paragraph.
    UU. The authority vested in the Secretary by Title XXVII of the 
Public Health Service Act, as amended by the Health Insurance 
Portability and Accountability Act of 1986, Public Law 104-191.
    This delegation shall be exercised under the Department's policy on 
regulations. In addition, I hereby affirm and ratify any actions taken 
by the Administrator or other HCFA officials which, in effect, involved 
the exercise of this authority prior to the effective date of this 
delegation.
    This delegation is effective immediately.

    Dated: June 11, 1998.
Donna E. Shalala,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-16592 Filed 6-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4120-07-M
```
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 227

To amend title 10, United States Code, to remove a restriction on the

requirement for the Secretary of the Air Force to dispose of real property

at deactivated intercontinental ballistic missile facilities to adjacent landowners.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 27 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

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

to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To amend title 10, United States Code, to remove a restriction on the requirement for the Secretary of the Air

Force to dispose of real property at deactivated intercontinental ballistic missile facilities to adjacent landowners.

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

3 SECTION 1. DISPOSITION OF REAL PROPERTY AT MISSILE

4 SITES TO ADJACENT LANDOWNERS.

5 Subparagraph (D) of section 9781(a)(2) of title 10,

6 United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
2

S 227 IS

1 ‘‘(D) is surrounded by one or more tracts of

2 land that are owned by one or more owners.’’.

Æ
No. 10-5551.

#### Christopher Allen Hargrave, Petitioner v. Arizona.

562 U.S. 928, 131 S. Ct. 317,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7205.

178 L. Ed. 2d 207,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Arizona denied.

Same case below, 225 Ariz. 1, 234 P.3d 569.