alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Former disposal operations director inducted into 2021 DLA Hall of Fame

/ Published Jan. 6, 2022
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
*Editor’s note: This is one of five stories featuring 2021 DLA Hall of Fame inductees. A video highlighting inductees’ contributions to the agency will be broadcast on DLA’s Facebook page Jan. 11.*

A former disposal operations director who led innovative solutions throughout his 32-year career is a 2021 Defense Logistics Agency Hall of Fame inductee. 

Thomas Legeret of DLA Disposition Services headed creation of the Controlled Property Verification Office, transfer of the Law Enforcement Support Office, support to several natural disasters and a joint project for the first-time transfer of excess Marine Corps-owned material to DLA. 

Following then-Vice President Al Gore’s National Performance Review in 1993, Legeret re-engineered the process for selling surplus government property by privatizing usable and scrap sales programs. 

In 2006, he established teams at DLA sites around the world to conduct final reviews that continue to ensure controlled and government-sensitive property isn’t released to the general public. He also worked with DLA supply centers to reduce orders for new items the agency had serviceable duplicates of. 

“As a result, DLA recouped back to stock 49,369 lines with an original acquisition value of $184 million,” according to his nomination.

Legeret led the implementation of automated want lists that allow customers to build “wish lists” of needed items and receive electronic notification when those items are added to inventory. By his retirement in 2012, customers had received $517 million worth of property through wish lists. 

Military units and federal agencies also received vital supplies from Legeret’s team during natural disasters including hurricanes Rita and Katrina as well as overseas tsunami and earthquake relief efforts. 

During the transfer of DLA’s Law Enforcement Support Office from DLA Headquarters to DLA Disposition Services from fiscal 2007 to 2009, Legeret ensured seamless support as operations and staff relocated to Battle Creek, Michigan. 

“In fiscal 2010, the Law Enforcement Support Office established its program compliance review mission, completed its first annual controlled property inventory and had a record year for reutilization, exceeding $160 million,” according to his nomination. 

Visit DLA’s Hall of Fame website for more information about other 2021 inductees and members from previous years.
# ServiceNow brings DLA financial agreement functions together

/ Published Feb. 22, 2023
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
A new capability in ServiceNow will help streamline agreement processes and reporting requirements for interagency financial transactions at the Defense Logistics Agency.

The tool will be a one-stop shop for agreements for the Treasury Department’s G-Invoicing system and other documents such as memorandums of understanding, memorandums of agreement, and state and local government agreements, said Max Walens, head of DLA’s G-Invoicing Center of Excellence.

The platform was developed by DLA Information Operations and successfully tested in January. It’s expected to be rolled out in phases to DLA’s major subordinate commands later this year.

“We’ll have a single system capturing the evidentiary matter all in one place for DLA, serving as a single system repository for storage and records management keeping, and have the ability to coordinate agreements in the system instead of working them through email or DLA’s Task Management Tracker,” Walens said.

He added that ServiceNow can communicate with the Treasury Department’s platform for G-Invoicing agreements.

Having all agreements in one location will make data and metrics available in real time across the agency, said Jodi Beard, DLA Transformation’s program manager for support agreements. The system will help the agency comply with audit requirements and stop the practice of storing agreements on local share drives or other locations. It will also help with succession management of agreements that span up to 10 years, she said.

The initial rollout of the system will be as a management tool for developing agreements on the G-Invoicing side. The second phase will further develop the agreement side for DLA Transformation and eventually eliminate a monthly agreement-reporting requirement for all agency organizations. DLA has over 2,500 agreements with roughly one-third of those being non-reimbursable agreements, Beard said.

Developers are working on a data import function for existing agreements and the ability to pull information from the system to generate reports.

DLA Aviation will be the first to migrate information into ServiceNow and other organizations will follow as the process is developed and DLA Transformation works with system developers to resolve data discrepancies or issues.

“We’re learning as we go,” Beard said, adding that new users will soon receive training.

Proposed benefits of G-Invoicing include better communication between trading partners, increased transparency, common data standards, agreed-upon processes, and the ability to send and receive funds quickly and efficiently.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 116 (Wednesday, June 17, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 33121]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16061]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Declaration of Disaster #3086]


Arkansas; (and Contiguous Counties in Texas and Parishes in 
Louisiana)

    Miller County and the contiguous Counties of Hempstead, Lafayette, 
and Little River in Arkansas; Bowie and Cass Counties in Texas; and 
Bossier and Caddo Parishes in Louisiana constitute a disaster area as a 
result of damages caused by heavy rains and flash flooding that 
occurred on May 27 and 28, 1998. Applications for loans for physical 
damages caused by this disaster may be filed until the close of 
business on August 6, 1998 and for economic injury until the close of 
business on March 5, 1999 at the address listed below or other locally 
announced locations:

Business Administration, isaster Area 3 Office, 4400 Amon Carter Blvd., 
Suite 102, Ft. Worth, TX 76155.

    The interest rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:                                                    
  Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere.................      7.000
  Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere..............      3.500
  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 numbers assigned to this disaster for physical damages are 
308606 for Arkansas; 308706 for Texas; and 308806 for Louisiana. For 
economic injury the numbers are 988300 for Arkansas; 988400 for Texas; 
and 988500 for Louisiana.

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

    Dated: June 5, 1998.
Aida Alvarez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-16061 Filed 6-16-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
# C_2014039EN.01001301.xml

| 8.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 39/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 39/13

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 2 December 2013 — Jean-Bernard Lafonta v Autorité des marchés financiers

(Case C-628/13)

2014/C 39/20

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Jean-Bernard Lafonta

Appellant:

Respondent: Autorité des marchés financiers

Respondent:

Question referred

Question referred

Must Article 1(1) of Directive 2003/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on insider dealing and market manipulation (market abuse) (1) and Article 1(1) and (2) of Commission Directive 2003/124/EC of 22 December 2003 implementing Directive 2003/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the definition and public disclosure of inside information and the definition of market manipulation (2) be interpreted as meaning that only information in respect of which it may be determined, with a sufficient degree of probability, that, once it is made public, its potential effect on the prices of the financial instruments concerned will be in a particular direction may constitute inside information?

1

2

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 96, p. 16.

1

(2)  OJ 2003 L 339, p. 70.

2

---
### ThesmiEOF Texas ^t1^^h("Tsc^ceivedin COURT OF CRIMINALAPPEALS &H APPEAL vtoo STttCoLTT oF AcPPEWJl 20 2015 In Oaosc Wo TO^&Tl AbeiAcosta.cierkx 

## "ToT^\bwbsyi®^3u(^s oP^fe C_CORT; r\ bs Lnso^rrcP-rhb mohbn Weoid Show to^K^ ccor-V oV hppeaig • w Cg^wJMSbTS ^P JUL 27 2015 

# 2^W cfadLi^erRUmafiek^l^S^ w^TM5^^^ QRuwaiCus- 

### ry 

## Ym. kwAeA. 'fefes5 ftxTiftuA ewro oPffls^
#### People v Cambridge

2d Dept: 145 AD3d 795 (Queens)

denied 3/17/17 (DiFiore, Ch. J.)
#### Community National Bank, Respondent, v Hollis Care Group, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[63 NYS3d 488]

In an action, inter alia, for replevin and to recover money due on a promissory note and the personal and corporate guarantees thereon, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Parga, J.), entered January 30, 2015, which, upon an order of the same court entered December 18, 2014, granting those branches of the plaintiff’s motion which were for summary judgment on the first, fourth, and fifth causes of action and dismissing the counterclaims, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $2,977,240.79.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

In May 2014, the plaintiff, Community National Bank, commenced this action alleging that a promissory note by the defendant Hollis Care Group, Inc. (hereinafter Hollis), was in default, and that the personal and corporate guarantees executed by the remaining defendants, as well as the security agreement pledging security interest in all of Hollis’s assets, were in breach and default. The plaintiff sought immediate possession of the collateral as well as the remaining sum due on the note. The defendants asserted several counterclaims. Eventually, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the complaint and dismissing the counterclaims. The defendants opposed the motion. The Supreme Court awarded the plaintiff *605summary judgment on the first (breach of contract), fourth (replevin), and fifth (breach of guarantees) causes of action, and dismissing the counterclaims. A judgment was entered in the principal sum of $2,977,240.79, and the defendants appeal.

The plaintiff made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the first, fourth, and fifth causes of action and dismissing the counterclaims (see *Ahmad v Luce,*147 AD3d 888, 888 [2017]; *Gangi v Solgar Co.,*267 AD2d 350, 350 [1999]; *cf. Agai v Diontech Consulting, Inc.,*64 AD3d 622, 623 [2009]). In opposition, the defendants failed to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact. Specifically, none of the contentions raised by the defendants concerned the validity of the note or the guarantees *(see Ahmad v Luce,*147 AD3d at 888; *Gangi v Solgar Co.,*267 AD2d at 350). The defendants’ remaining contention is without merit. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the first, fourth, and fifth causes of action, and dismissing the counterclaims.

Dillon, J.P., Balkin, Hall and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
# C_2014078EN.01000302.xml

| 15.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/3

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal) lodged on 13 December 2013 — Surgicare — Unidades de Saúde SA v Fazenda Pública

(Case C-662/13)

2014/C 78/06

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Surgicare — Unidades de Saúde SA

Applicant:

Defendant: Fazenda Pública

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

When the tax authorities suspect the existence of an abusive practice designed to obtain a VAT refund and Portuguese law provides for a mandatory preliminary procedure applicable to abusive practices in taxation matters, is that procedure to be regarded as inapplicable to VAT, given the Community origin of that tax?

---
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Timothy McVey, Appellant.

[58 NYS3d 336]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Efrain Alvarado, J.), entered on or about September 15, 2016, which adjudicated defendant a level two sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion in granting the People’s request for an upward departure based on the egregiousness and extent of defendant’s involvement with child pornography, which were not adequately accounted for in the risk assessment instrument, and which outweighed the mitigating factors cited by defendant *(see People v Velasquez,*143 AD3d 583 [1st Dept 2016], *lv denied*28 NY3d 914 [2017]). We reject defendant’s argument that defendants in child pornography possession cases are inherently prejudiced by assessment under the Risk Assessment Instrument, and the upward or downward departure protocol *(see People v Gillotti,*23 NY3d 841, 855 [2014]; *People v Johnson,*11 NY3d 416, 420-421 [2008]). We also reject defendant’s assertion that the court improperly failed to take into account the “totality of the circumstances” when weighing the aggravating and mitigating circumstances of defendant’s case (see *People v Gillotti,*23 NY3d at 861).

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments.

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Webber, Gesmer and Kern, JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 24
- 0056 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, vs. CHAD JEROME WOLFCHILD,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including August 2 , 202 4, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 26 2024

06/26/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0056
VI

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2457

For the relief of Benchmark Rail Group, Inc.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 23 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

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

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Benchmark Rail Group, Inc.

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

3 SECTION 1. FINDING AND PURPOSE.

4 (a) FINDING.—The Congress finds that Benchmark

5 Rail Group, Inc., of St. Louis, Missouri, satisfactorily per6 formed emergency work after the Northridge earthquake,

7 but has not been reimbursed as a result of a technicality

8 under California State law.

9 (b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this Act is to fairly

10 compensate Benchmark Rail Group, Inc., for the work for

11 which, except for the technicality under California State

12 law, it would otherwise have been paid under the provi-
2

•S 2457 IS

1 sions of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer2 gency Assistance Act.

3 SEC. 2. PAYMENT.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 30 days after the

5 date of enactment of this Act, the director of the Federal

6 Emergency Management Agency shall pay to Benchmark

7 Rail Group, Inc., of St. Louis, Missouri, an amount equal

8 to the total amount owed to Benchmark Rail Group, Inc.,

9 by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the

10 State of California to compensate Benchmark Rail Group,

11 Inc., for the emergency work and services performed at

12 the request of the Southern California Regional Rail Au13 thority, to the extent that such work and services are oth14 erwise eligible for reimbursement under the Robert T.

15 Stafford Disaster and Emergency Assistance Act. The

16 payment shall be made from funds appropriated to imple17 ment such Act.

18 (b) DEOBLIGATION OF FUNDS.—The Federal Emer19 gency Management Agency shall deobligate an equal

20 amount to that obligated previously for payment to the

21 State of California to cover the costs of work performed

22 for the Southern California Regional Rail Authority by

23 Benchmark Rail Group, Inc., after the Northridge earth-
3

•S 2457 IS

1 quake which would have been eligible for reimbursement

2 under such Act.

Æ
#### Com. v. Montanez

09/28/2015

129 EAL (2015)

Denied

Pa.Super., 120 A.3d 372
# DLA regional commanders: We couldn’t function without Troop Support

/ Published Dec. 8, 2015
PHILADELPHIA, 

The Defense Logistics Agency’s regional commanders expressed their gratitude for the efforts of the DLA Troop Support workforce during a visit Dec. 2.“Working in (U.S. Central Command), where there’s been active war for the last nearly 15 years, we live and die by these supply chains,” said Army Col. Derrin Williams, DLA Central commander.Williams was joined by Army Col. Elizabeth Keough, DLA Europe and Africa commander, and Army Col. Richard Ellis, DLA Pacific commander. They are DLA’s senior representatives in their respective regions.While spending the week at DLA Headquarters in Fort Belvoir, Virginia, the three commanders traveled to Philadelphia to meet with representatives of DLA Troop Support’s five supply chains and tour the flag room.“We mainly wanted to come say thanks,” Keough said. “We couldn’t function without the work that Troop Support does.”Williams’s gratitude for the Clothing and Textiles supply chain was personal. He was shot by a sniper while deployed to Iraq. But thanks to body armor provided through C&T, the impact was minimized, he said.“I appreciate the time that goes into testing the (Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert) plates,” Williams told Keith Ford, C&T deputy director. “I appreciate you making sure it’s right.”Keough specifically thanked Mary Martin, with the Medical supply chain’s Plans and Integration division, by presenting her a commander’s coin for her work in support of Operation United Assistance. OUA was the Defense Department mission in West Africa to help stop the spread of the deadly Ebola virus.Martin oversaw the transportation of personal protective equipment for personnel from DOD, U.S. Agency for International Development and the Public Health Service. Medical provided more than 1.4 million protective suits, in addition to surgical gloves and surgical masks in support of OUA, Martin said.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT R AYM OND A. R OLES, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. M ELODEE AR

M FIELD, De fe nda

nt - Appe lle e . No. 14-35056 D.C . No. 1:12-c v-00363-EJL M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Distric t of Ida

ho Edwa rd J. Lodge , Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 17, 2015 * * B e fore : O’ SC ANNLAIN, LEAVY, a n d FER N ANDEZ, C irc uit Judge s. Idaho sta te prisone r R aym ond A. R o le s a p pe a ls pro sefrom

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismi ssing his 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c t ion a lle g ing a viola tion of his right to dueproc e ss in c o nne c tion with a disc iplina ry he aring. W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie w de novo. C holla Re ady

Mix , Inc . 

# FIL ED FEB 27 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).v . C

iv ish , 382 F.3d 969, 973 (9th C ir. 2004) (dismissa l on theba sis of a sta tute of lim ita tions); Re s nic k v . Hay e

s , 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th C ir. 2000) (dismissa l unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1915A). W e a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly dism isse d R ole s’ s due proc e ss c l a im a s ba rre d by the s tat ute of lim ita

t ions be c a use R ole s file d this a c tion m ore tha n two y e ars a fte r his c la i m a ga i n st de fe nda

nt Arm fie ld a

rose . Se e Idaho C ode § 5-219(4) (two-y e ar sta tute of lim ita

tions for pe rsona l injury

c la i m s); C

anate l la v . Van De

K amp , 486 F.3d 1128, 1132-33 (9th C ir. 2007) (forum sta te ’ s pe rsona l injury

sta tute of lim ita tions a nd tolling la

ws a pply to § 1983 a c tions; fe de ra l la w de te rm ine s whe n a c ivil rights c l a im

a c c rue s, whic h

is whe n the pla intiff knows or ha s re a son to know of the injury

whic h is the ba sis of thea c tion). W e re je c t R ole s’ s a rgum e nts c onc e rning a c c rua l a

nd the c ontinuing viola

tion doc t rine . The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion by

de ny i ng R ole s’ s m o tion for re lie f from

judgm e nt be c a

u se R ole s fa i le d to e sta

blish grounds wa

rranting re c o nside ration. Se eSc h. Dist. N o. 1J , Multnomah C

nty ., Or. v . AC

a ndS, Inc . , 5 F.3d 1255, 1262-63 (9th C ir. 1993) (se tting forth sta nda rd of re vie w a

nd fa c tors for re c o nside ration unde r Fe d. R . C iv. P. 60(b)). AFFIRM E D.

1 4 - 3 5 0 5 6 2