alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DLA Energy Pacific at Guam QAR goes above, beyond for Air Force One
 
  By Elizabeth Stoeckmann, DLA Energy Public Affairs
  A Defense Logistics Agency Energy Pacific at Guam quality assurance representative’s initiative and expertise recently enabled timely support of presidential aircraft Air Force One in the nation of Laos. Andrew Vallance’s day turned out to be anything but routine when he arrived at Wattay International Airport in Vientiane, Laos in support of Air Force One requirements Sept. 2. It was Vallance’s job to ensure Air Force One’s fuel was tested properly and deemed safe before it was pumped into the president’s aircraft. However, he noticed something wasn’t quite right with the testing requirements performed by a fuel laboratory unit in Laos. After multiple testing inconsistencies and for safety reasons, it was necessary to take the samples elsewhere to meet the requirements and timeframe. “I coordinated with the White House Advance Team for a flight from Laos to Thailand to run the required tests, but the mission was a no-go,” Vallance said. Without delay, he coordinated with the U.S. Embassy Defense Attache Office for support of a secure fuel resource facility to conduct the testing. The U.S. Embassy in Laos chartered a vehicle and driver to transport him and the required samples to Bangkok for testing. Vallance was under a lot of pressure to ensure he was at the Laos/Thailand border before it closed for the night and proceed on a 12-hour, overnight road trip.
 
“This was a big deal for our region,” said DLA Energy Guam Deputy Director Victor Madaris. “It was the first time a U. S. president visited the country of Laos and we supported the mission.” The next morning the receiving fuel lab in Bangkok was on standby ready to meet Vallance for the testing. Testing requirements were successful and final certificates were sent to the Advance team for mission requirements on the presidential aircraft.
 
“Vallance’s initiatives and perseverance ensured Air Force One was supported with on specification fuel on time and safely,” Madaris said. DLA Energy Pacific at Guam supports the Pacific Command Joint Petroleum Office as the Sub Area Petroleum Office Western Pacific, with a primary goal of providing effective and efficient supply operations to enable the projection and sustainment of joint bulk petroleum in theater. The goal of bulk petroleum support is to fulfill the requirements of the combatant commander’s concept of operations and intent.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer  Required by Rule 13a-14(b) or 15d-14(b)  of the Exchange Act

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Advanstar, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2005
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph Loggia, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

|By: |  | /s/JOSEPH LOGGIAJoseph Loggia
Chief Executive Officer
|--- |  | -----------------------------------------------------
|    |  | Date: May 16, 2005                                   
|    |  |                                                      

---





QuickLinks
No. 10-6370.

#### In re Edward Starling, Petitioner.

562 U.S. 980, 131 S. Ct. 443,

178 L. Ed. 2d 321,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8287.

October 18, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until November 8, 2010, within which to pay the docketing fees required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1of the Rules of this Court.
# C_2013215EN.01002001.xml

| 27.7.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 215/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 215/20

---

Action brought on 29 January 2013 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-9/13)

2013/C 215/28

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the Commission’s decision to set off the sum corresponding to the costs it was ordered to pay by the General Court in Case T-176/04 against the sum which the applicant is required to pay pursuant to the order in Case T-241/03.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the note of 6 March 2012; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the note of 6 March 2012;

| — | Annul the decision to effect recovery by offsetting the debt of EUR 1 600 owed by the Commission to the applicant against the sum of EUR 4 875 purportedly owed by the applicant to the Commission, which is denied; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision to effect recovery by offsetting the debt of EUR 1 600 owed by the Commission to the applicant against the sum of EUR 4 875 purportedly owed by the applicant to the Commission, which is denied;

| — | Annul, in so far as necessary, the decision rejecting the complaint lodged on 23 June 2012 sent by the applicant to the Commission and received by the latter at a date not later than 23 June 2012; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul, in so far as necessary, the decision rejecting the complaint lodged on 23 June 2012 sent by the applicant to the Commission and received by the latter at a date not later than 23 June 2012;

| — | Annul the note of 27 August 2012 received by the applicant on 9 October 2012, |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the note of 27 August 2012 received by the applicant on 9 October 2012,

| — | Order the Commission to reimburse the applicant in respect of all the costs incurred in the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission to reimburse the applicant in respect of all the costs incurred in the present proceedings.

---
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.A

                            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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2003, of ANR Pipeline Company (the "Company") as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John W.
Somerhalder II, Chairman of the Board (Principal Executive Officer), certify (i)
that the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                     /s/ John W. Somerhalder II
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     John W. Somerhalder II
                                     Chairman of the Board
                                     (Principal Executive Officer)

                                     May 14, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to ANR Pipeline Company and will be retained by ANR Pipeline Company
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
Exhibit 32.1



                            Section 906 Certification


I, Richard L. Hannigan, Sr., Chief Executive Officer and President of Voyager
Entertainment International, Inc., certify that (i) the attached annual report
on Form 10-KSB of Voyager Entertainment International, Inc. for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained
in the Form 10-KSB Report for said period in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of Voyager Entertainment
International, Inc.

/s/ Richard L. Hannigan, Sr.                            Dated: April 7, 2006
----------------------------                                   --------------
Richard L. Hannigan, Sr.
President and Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 110 (Tuesday, June 9, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 31502]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15284]



[[Page 31502]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families
[Program Announcement No. ACF/ACYF/CB-98-04]


Fiscal Year (FY) 1998 Notice of an Announcement of the 
Availability of Financial Assistance and Request for Applications To 
Support Demonstration Projects Under the Adoption Opportunities Program

AGENCY: Administration on Children, Youth and Families, ACYF, ACF, 
DHHS.

ACTION: Notice of Fiscal Year (FY) 1998 availability of financial 
assistance and request for applications to support demonstration 
projects under the Adoption Opportunities Program, Title II of the 
Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, as amended, Pub. L. 104-235.

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

SUMMARY: The Children's Bureau, within the Administration on Children, 
Youth and Families announces the availability of FY 1998 funds for 
competing new discretionary grants under the Adoption Opportunities 
Program. Adoption Opportunities Program funds are designed to provide 
services that facilitate the elimination of barriers to adoption and to 
provide permanent loving homes for children who would benefit from 
adoption, particularly children with special needs. Specific priority 
areas for which grant awards are being solicited include:

98.1--National Resource Center on Special Needs Adoption
98.2--Administration of the Interstate Compact on Adoption and Medical 
Assistance
98.3--Achieving Increased Adoptive Placements of Children in Foster 
Care
98.4--Effective Collaborations for Timely Adoptions
98.5--Overcoming State and Local Barriers to Adoption
98.6--Adoption 2002 Support Project
98.7--Post-Legal Adoption Services

DATES: The date and time deadline for RECEIPT of applications by DHHS 
for new grants under this announcement 4:30 p.m. (Eastern Time Zone) on 
July 24, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Copies of the program announcement will be automatically sent to all 
current Adoption Opportunities Program grantees, all organizations that 
applied for grant awards in FY 97 and all individuals and organizations 
that have asked to be placed on the mailing list for FY 1998. Copies of 
the program announcement can be obtained the ACYF Operations Center at 
1-800-351-2293. A copy of this program announcement is also located at 
the CB website at http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/CB under Policy and 
Funding Announcements.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Grant awards of FY 1998 funds will be made 
by September 30, 1998. The estimated funds available for new awards is 
$4.9 million and the approximate number of new grants is estimated at 
28.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. Number 93.652, Adoption 
Opportunities Grants)

    Dated: June 3, 1998.
James A. Harrell,
Deputy Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and Families.
[FR Doc. 98-15284 Filed 6-8-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-M
#### David Ahern et al., Respondents, v City of Syracuse, Appellant.

[53 NYS3d 787]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (James P. Murphy, J.), entered April 19, 2016. The order denied the motion of defendant for summary judgment.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this negligence action seeking damages for injuries allegedly sustained by David Ahern (plaintiff) when he tripped and fell on a broken curb. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiffs *(see Vega v Restani Constr. Corp.,*18 NY3d 499, 503 [2012]), we conclude that Supreme Court properly determined that plaintiffs raised an issue of fact sufficient to defeat defendant’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant met its initial burden by establishing that it did not receive prior written notice of the allegedly dangerous or defective condition, and the burden therefore shifted to plaintiffs to demonstrate “as relevant here, that defendant affirmatively *1671created the defect through an act of negligence . . . that immediately resulted] in the existence of a dangerous condition” *(Simpson v City of Syracuse,*147 AD3d 1336, 1337 [2017] [internal quotation marks omitted]). In opposition to the motion, plaintiffs submitted evidence that plaintiff was very familiar with the condition of the walk and curb both before and after excavation work performed by defendant inasmuch as he had parked on that street almost daily for approximately 10 years. Plaintiff testified that he observed the area immediately after construction fencing was removed and noticed that the curb had been damaged. Plaintiff also testified that no other repairs took place at the site from the time of the excavation until his fall approximately six months later. We therefore conclude that plaintiffs raised an issue of fact whether defendant’s affirmative act of negligence “ ‘immediately result [ed] in the existence of a dangerous condition’ ” *(Yarborough v City of New York,*10 NY3d 726, 728 [2008]; *cf. Duffel v City of Syracuse,*103 AD3d 1235, 1236 [2013]).

Contrary to defendant’s further contention, it is not entitled to summary judgment because the alleged dangerous condition is open and obvious. “The fact that a dangerous condition is open and obvious does not negate the duty to maintain premises in a reasonably safe condition, but, rather, bears only on the injured person’s comparative fault” *(Bax v Allstate Health Care, Inc.,*26 AD3d 861, 863 [2006]; *see Custodi v Town of Amherst,*81 AD3d 1344, 1346-1347 [2011], *affd*20 NY3d 83 [2012]).

Present—Peradotto, J.P., Lindley, Troutman and Scud-der, JJ.
2017-0477.

#### State v. Romanko.

Cuyahoga App. No. 104158, 2017-Ohio-739.
In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 08-780V

(Not to be published)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

*

Mr. and Mrs. CHARLIE JACOBS, *

as parents and legal representatives *

of M.A.J., a minor, *

*

Petitioners, * 

* Filed: January 29, 2015

v. *

* Decision on Attorneys’

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND * Fees and Costs

HUMAN SERVICES *

*

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

DECISION (ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS)

In this case under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program,1I issued a 

decision on June 13, 2014. On January 28, 2015, the parties filed a Stipulation Regarding Final

Attorneys’ Fees and Litigation Costs in this matter. The parties’ stipulation requests a total 

payment of $23,590.50, representing attorneys’ fees and costs of $23,260.00, and $330.50 of 

costs expended by petitioners. 

An award for fees and costs is appropriate at this time, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa15(b) and (e)(1). Further, the proposed amounts seem reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, 

I hereby award the following attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(b) and 

(e)(1):

• a lump sum of $23,260.00, in the form of a check payable jointly to petitioners 

and petitioners’ counsel, Clifford J. Shoemaker, on account of services performed 

by counsel’s law firm. 

 

1 The applicable statutory provisions defining the program are found at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq. (2006). 
• a lump sum of $330.50, in the form of a check payable to petitioners, 

which represents petitioners’ own litigation expenses in this case.

In the absence of a timely-filed motion for review filed pursuant to Appendix B of the 

Rules of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, the clerk of the court shall enter judgment in 

accordance herewith.2

IT IS SO ORDERED

 /s/ George L. Hastings, Jr.

 George L. Hastings, Jr.

 Special Master

 

2

Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties may expedite entry of judgment by filing a joint notice renouncing the 

right to seek review.
No. 12-7708.

#### Cunningham *v.*United States.

C. A. 6th Cir.-Certiorari denied.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA



### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT

JASON SMITH

,

Appellant

,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee.

No. 2D 20 2 3

- 0674

May 17

, 202 4

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Lyann Goudie,

Judge.

J ason Smith , pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Jonathan S. Tannen,

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee

.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

KHOUZAM

, MORRIS, and LUCAS , JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
# Law Enforcement Support Office hosts state coordinators for in-person training

/ Published June 21, 2021
BATTLE CREEK, Mich., 
State coordinators from Nevada, New Mexico, and Arizona, visited the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center to participate in a two-day training and assistance visit hosted by Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services Law Enforcement Support Office June 15.

                Mike Cannon, Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services Director, welcomes state coordinators to the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center on June 15, 2021, for Law Enforcement Support Office state training.                            Law Enforcement Support Office hosts state coordinators for in-person training                            Mike Cannon, Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services Director, welcomes state coordinators to the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center on June 15, 2021, for Law Enforcement Support Office state training.            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: Jason ShambergerVIRIN: 210615-D-AU600-100This is the first formal face-to-face training LESO has completed with its governor appointed state coordinators and state point-of-contacts since the pandemic. Training topics included 1033 program compliance policies, annual inventory procedures, how to requisition property, and more.

Disposition Services Director Mike Cannon delivered opening remarks touching on the importance of the relationship between LESO personnel and state liaisons.  

“The key control measure in this program are the state coordinators and state POCs,” Cannon said. “That’s the key. You are more important to this program, to the accountability management than we are. All the requests come through you and all communication goes out through you. You are the very key to the program. We will do everything we can to support you.”

The LESO program facilitates 10 US Code 2576a which allows the transfer of certain excess Department of Defense property to law enforcement agencies across the United States and its territories. Participating States appoint a coordinator who act as a liaison and compliance officer to the law enforcement agencies and LESO program. There are approximately 8,550 state and local participating LEAs and 180 federal participating LEAs.

Newly assigned, state point-of-contact and chief of police for Buckeye Arizona Police Department Larry Hall was grateful for the opportunity to attend the training in-person.

“Having a personal connection with personnel assigned to LESO [and] understanding their role and what I can do in my role to make their job a lot easier. That’s something you can’t get from a virtual meeting,” he said.

Hall is a veteran to the program and has been participating in annual inventories for controlled property acquired through the LESO program since 2008.

----

More information on the LESO program can be found on the LESO webpage including the most frequently asked questions.
# Enlisted Excellence at DLA Maritime Pearl Harbor

/ Published Aug. 2, 2016
PEARL HARBOR, Hawaii, Sailors assigned to the Defense Logistics Agency have earned a reputation for supporting the customer, working as a team, and getting the job done.  The current enlisted workforce at DLA Maritime Pearl Harbor is comprised of 10 Sailors, whose primary mission is to support the material needs of more than 30 shops at the Intermediate Maintenance Facility of the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard.  During the Navy’s most recent advancement examination cycle, the Logistics Specialist rating advanced nine percent of all candidates, which was two percent less than the Navy’s average.  All DLA Maritime Pearl Harbor candidates passed the advancement exam—three of the Sailors earned scores higher than 90 percent of all other candidates, and two Sailors were selected for advancement to Petty Officer First Class.  In June LS2 Chanell Edwards and LS2 Alvaro Gonzalez were frocked to First Class Petty Officer by CDR Thomas Marszalek, director, DLA Maritime Pearl Harbor.In May DLA received three quotas to advance Sailors using the Navy’s Meritorious Advancement Program (MAP).  The MAP program allows Sailors serving on shore duty to be eligible for spot promotions.  LS2 Gregory Garcia’s history of outstanding performance, high advancement test scores, community service, and off duty education efforts earned his selection as DLA Land and Maritime’s nomination for MAP.  LS2 Garcia then went on to compete against multiple commands from other Primary Level Field Activities, which resulted in his selection by DLA for advancement to Petty Officer First Class.  Retention rates at DLA Maritime Pearl Harbor are at a record high with more quality Sailors choosing to make the military a career.  Most recently, LS2 Garcia reenlisted in May and LS1 Trovato reenlisted in June.  The combined efforts of all Sailors at DLA Maritime Pearl Harbor have helped to develop a team atmosphere where Sailors are supporting their customers, advancing in their ranks, making the military a career, and enjoying their shore duty.  Their hard work has made DLA Maritime Pearl Harbor a truly sought after shore duty and a great place to work.
#### People v Morris (Willie)

3d Dept: 140 AD3d 1472 (Albany)

denied reconsideration 3/13/17 (Rivera, J.)
# C_2014421EN.01005501.xml

| 24.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/55 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/55

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 10 July 2014 — Mészáros v Commission

(Case F-22/13) (1)

1

((Civil service - Competitions - Notice of competition EPSO/AD/207/11 - Successful candidate included on the reserve list - Verification by the appointing authority of the conditions for taking part in an AD 7 grade competition - Professional experience of a shorter duration than the minimum duration required - Manifest error of assessment by the selection board - Withdrawal by the appointing authority of the offer of employment - Mandatory duty of the appointing authority))

2014/C 421/77

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Mátyás Tamás Mészáros (Kraków, Poland) (represented by: M. Pecyna, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Eggers and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision rejecting the request for recruitment of the applicant made by ESTAT and finding that the applicant did not meet the conditions for admission to competition EPSO/AD/207/11.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly unfounded. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly unfounded.

| 2. | The European Commission is to bear its own costs and shall pay the costs incurred by Mr Mészáros. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The European Commission is to bear its own costs and shall pay the costs incurred by Mr Mészáros.

---

(1)  OJ C 291, 5.10.2013, p. 7.

1

---