alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Distribution Standard System goes live at DLA Distribution detachment sites

/ Published Aug. 24, 2015
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pennsylvania, 
In 2010, the storage missions at the Naval Construction Battalions in Port Hueneme, Calif., and Gulfport, Miss., transferred to Defense Logistics Agency Distribution as part of the Navy Warehouse Transfer initiative.  These sites originally reported to Naval Supply Systems Command and supported the Navy Seabee battalions at these locations.  Port Hueneme is now under the direction of DLA Distribution San Diego, while Gulfport falls under DLA Distribution Jacksonville.  

The NWT initiative uses the DLA Distribution network to meet customer requirements and allows the Navy to concentrate on delivering global logistics services to fleet and joint operational units. The partnership between NAVSUP and DLA was born out of a Navy Program Objective Memorandum 10 initiative to generate savings the Navy can use to build the future force. In leveraging this relationship, NAVSUP is seeking new ways to use its resources to improve current and future logistics operations.

In order to ensure proper accountability of the materiel in storage, as well as maximize audit readiness and process excellence, DLA Distribution along with the Information Operations team, Port Hueneme and Gulfport implemented the Distribution Standard System.

DSS is an automated information system that manages all functional business processes of DLA’s warehouse operations. These processes include receiving, storage, consolidation, packing, shipping, inventory, inspection and workload management. The system includes both commercial-off-the-shelf software packages and developed application software.

Leading the efforts, DLA Distribution Future Plans office along with representatives from DLA Distributions Current Operations office, subject matter experts, and the DSS team from DLA Information Operations visited the two sites in October and November of 2014. Having conducted site surveys and terrain walks, the team identified the steps necessary to implement DSS. Additionally, the team identified that the Seabee supply and warehouse management system had no interfaces with systems outside the Naval Facilities Command.  DLA Distribution Future Operations office and the Information Operations team worked together to develop short-term measures to conduct a successful operation until the coding for interfaces between DSS and NAVFAC’s supply management system was complete.

“Our people amaze me in their ability to work so well with others and integrate with personnel not only from New Cumberland, Pa., but with personnel in the field,” said DLA Distribution J4 director, Sonya Gish. “DLA Distribution worked as one team to make these efforts so successful.”

During the implementation phases, the subject matter experts worked with site employees, IT analysts and instructors to rollout DSS and execute standardized processes properly.  

“The DLA Distribution/J62D team ensured there were no gaps in execution,” said Gish.
<PAGE>
                                      
                        INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on 
Form S-8 of IWL Communications, Inc. of our report dated September 9, 1997, 
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of IWL Communications, Inc. and 
Subsidiaries as of June 30, 1997 and 1996 and the related consolidated 
statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of 
the years in the three-year period ended June 30, 1997 which report appears 
in the Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on 
September 29, 1997.

                                            KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP 

Houston, Texas
September 29, 1997
Exhibit (10.2) 



ALLIANT ENERGY
CORPORATION
INTERSTATE POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY 
WISCONSIN POWER AND
LIGHT COMPANY 



Summary of
Compensation and Benefits for
Non-Employee Directors  
Effective January 1, 2005  



        Effective
January 1, 2005, the compensation for non-employee members of the Board of Directors (the
“Board”) of Alliant Energy Corporation, Interstate Power and Light Company and
Wisconsin Power and Light Company will be as follows: 



        Non-employee
members of the Board will be entitled to receive the following annual retainers as
applicable: 



	 	• 	$85,000
for each non-employee director;





	 	• 	$15,000
for the Lead Independent Director of the Board;





	 	• 	$10,000
for the Chairperson of the Audit Committee of the Board;





	 	• 	$3,500
for each member of the Audit Committee of the Board other than the Chairperson; and





	 	•	$5,000
for the Chairperson of each of the Compensation and Personnel Committee, the Nominating
and Governance Committee, and the Nuclear, Health and Safety Committee of the Board. 






Payments of all retainers shall be in
cash and shall be pro-rated for retiring directors and for those directors whose terms
shall expire at the Annual Meeting of Shareholders, with the balance of any annual
retainer amounts being paid following such director’s re-election at the Annual
Meeting of Shareholders. 



        Each
director may, and is encouraged to, voluntarily elect an amount of any of the cash
compensation retainers to purchase common stock of Alliant Energy Corporation under the
Shareowner Direct Plan or to have an amount be deferred in the Director’s Deferred
Compensation Plan Stock Account. 



        Alliant
Energy Corporation maintains a Director’s Charitable Award Program for directors who
were elected or appointed to the Board on or prior to January 1, 2005. Under the Program,
when a director dies, Alliant Energy Corporation will donate a total of $500,000 to one
qualified charitable organization or divide that amount among a maximum of five qualified
charitable organizations selected by the individual director. All deductions for
charitable contributions are taken by Alliant Energy Corporation, and the donations are
funded by Alliant Energy Corporation through life insurance policies on the directors.
No. 10-5493.

#### Mitchell Moore, Petitioner v. Ohio.

562 U.S. 925, 131 S. Ct. 308,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7313.

178 L. Ed. 2d 200,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Ohio, Lucas County, denied.
No. 10-6199.

#### Robert E. Dillard, Petitioner v. South Carolina.

562 U.S. 986, 131 S. Ct. 426,

178 L. Ed. 2d 332,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8131.

October 18, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of South Carolina denied.
2017-0467.

#### State v. Dumas.

Mahoning App. No. 15 MA 0101, 2017-Ohio-731.
# Small business training takes center stage for Disposition Services 

/ Published Feb. 2, 2024
BATTLE CREEK, Mich., 
Within the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center, members of the Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services Contracting team recently concluded a specialized training session on small business.

A contingent of hazardous waste and operational contracting officers gathered to discuss specific aspects of small business to include subcontracting plans and its various elements.

“Today we were very focused on compliance,” said Erin Clore the disposition services associate director of small business. “The goal of the training was to familiarize our contracting specialists with subcontracting requirements and regulations that pertain to the compliant execution of contracts.”

Due to the complex nature of certain contracts, the team has a host of resources at their disposal to ensure compliance. One of the many resources available is APEX Accelerators. This congressionally authorized program began in 1985 – formally known as the Procurement Technical Assistance Program. Its’ purpose is to expand the number of businesses that can participate in government contracts and to assist in the overall expansion of small business opportunities. Training participants were briefed on ways to use this program and other resources as they develop subcontracting plans.

“The purpose of striving for total compliance is so we’re effectively supporting small businesses,” said Clore. “After this training I hope [the team] understand the basics of small business subcontracting and know where to find the resources should they need more details on how to be compliant.”

The continued success of small business is something that benefits the entire country. Strengthening and increasing the diversity of the country’s small business base in turn helps to create a more resilient U.S. supply chain. Another training topic covered was subcontractor payment and its importance to small business.

“Small businesses are the backbone of the American economy,” said Clore. “If we are not paying them on time and supporting them it hurts the entire nation.”

Clore has overseen the small business division since April of 2022 and is working on ensuring members of her team, as well as those outside the Disposition Services framework, understand the importance of small business within the U.S. The next agency small business training session is slated for May 2024 along with the Michigan APEX Accelerator Alliance.
# C_2016364EN.01004401.xml

| 3.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 364/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 364/44

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 1 August 2016 — Mario Animali and Others v European Commission

(Case F-23/13) (1)

((Civil Service - Officials - Pensions - Article 11(2) of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations - Transfer to the EU pension scheme of pension rights acquired under other schemes - Decision recognising years of pensionable service applying the new GIPs relating to Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations - Article 81 of the Rules of Procedure - Action manifestly unfounded))

(2016/C 364/55)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: Mario Animali and Others (Brussels, Belgium) (represented initially by: D. de Abreu Caldas, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and É. Marchal, lawyers, and subsequently by: D. de Abreu Caldas and J.-N. Louis, lawyers, and finally by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: C. Ehrbar and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents, and subsequently by: J. Currall and G. Gattinara, acting as Agents, and finally by: G. Gattinara, acting as Agent)

Re:

Annulment of the decision transmitting the definitive calculation of the annuities for the transfer of the applicants’ pension rights to the European Union pension scheme under the new GIPs relating to Articles 11 and 12 of Annex VIII to the Staff Regulations of Officials.

Operative part of the order

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

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly unfounded.

| 2. | Each party shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Each party shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 156, 1.6.2013, p. 55.

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-2198

MICHELLE NYARKO,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DAVITA KIDNEY CARE; JOHN 1-10 DOES, Inclusive,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. 

Deborah Lynn Boardman, District Judge. (8:22-cv-01141-DLB)

Submitted: August 13, 2024 Decided: September 11, 2024

Before HARRIS, HEYTENS, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Michelle Nyarko, Appellant Pro Se. Jill Schultz Distler, Kathleen A. McGinley, 

JACKSON LEWIS PC, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-2198 Doc: 15 Filed: 09/11/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Michelle Nyarko appeals the district court’s orders granting DaVita Kidney Care’s

motion to dismiss Nyarko’s discrimination, failure-to-accommodate, and retaliation 

claims, brought pursuant to the American with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 to 

12213, and denying what the court construed as a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s 

orders. Nyarko v. Davita Kidney Care, No. 8:22-cv-01141-DLB (D. Md. filed Mar. 31, 

2023 & entered Apr. 3, 2023; Oct. 17, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-2198 Doc: 15 Filed: 09/11/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Yahya Alzandani, Appellant.

[66 NYS3d 296]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester *649County (Zambelli, J.), rendered May 26, 2015, convicting him of assault in the first degree (two counts) and gang assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to three concurrent determinate terms of imprisonment of 12 years, to be followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by reducing the sentences imposed from three concurrent determinate terms of imprisonment of 12 years, to be followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision, to three concurrent determinate terms of imprisonment of 7 years, to be followed by 5 years of postrelease supervision; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]; *People v Danielson,*9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor *(see People v Mateo,*2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see People v Romero,*7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The defendant’s claim that he was deprived of the constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel is based, in part, on matter appearing on the record and, in part, on matter outside the record, and thus constitutes a “mixed claim” of ineffective assistance *(People v Maxwell,*89 AD3d 1108, 1109 [2011]; *see People v Evans,*16 NY3d 571, 575 n 2 [2011]). In this case, it is not evident from the matter appearing on the record that the defendant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel *(see People v Cruz,*127 AD3d 987, 988 [2015]; *People v Robles,*116 AD3d 1071, 1071 [2014]). Since the defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance cannot be resolved without reference to matter outside the record, a CPL 440.10 proceeding is the appropriate forum for reviewing the claim in its entirety *(see People v Freeman,*93 AD3d 805, 806 [2012]; *People v Maxwell,*89 AD3d at 1109; *People v Rohlehr,*87 AD3d 603, 604 [2011]).

Although the County Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant youthful offender treatment *(see*CPL 720.20 [1]; *People v Curtis,*218 AD2d 667 [1995]; *People v Hampton,*148 AD2d 633 [1989]), under the circumstances of this case, the sentence imposed was excessive to the extent indicated herein.

Hall, J.P., Roman, Cohen and Barros, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 117 (Thursday, June 18, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 33360]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16151]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Army Science Board; Notice of Closed Meeting

    In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (P.L. 92-463), announcement is made of the following 
Committee Meeting:

    Name of Committee: Army Science Board (ASB).
    Date of Meeting: 15 June 1998.
    Time of Meeting: 0900-1600.
    Place: Edgewood, MD.
    Agenda: The Army Science Board's (ASB) Issue Group panel on 
``Review of Risk Assessment Methodology for Proposed DoD Range 
Rule'' will meet to the effort to scope and write their assessment 
of the risk methodology. This meeting will be closed to the public 
in accordance with Section 552b(c) of Title 5, U.S.C., specifically 
subparagraph (4) thereof, and Title 5, U.S.C., Appendix 2, 
subsection 10(d). The classified and unclassified matters to be 
discussed are so inextricably intertwined so as to preclude opening 
any portion of these meetings. For further information, please 
contact our office at (703) 604-7490.
Wayne Joyner,
Program Support Specialist, Army Science Board.
[FR Doc. 98-16151 Filed 6-17-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M
No. 10-92.

#### Christine Sahyers, Petitioner v. Prugh, Holliday & Karatinos, P.L., et al.

562 U.S. 981, 131 S. Ct. 415,

178 L. Ed. 2d 323,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8301.

October 18, 2010.

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

Same case below, 560 F.3d 1241.
No. 10-6986.

#### Richard V. Harrison, Petitioner v. International Business Machines (IBM) Corp.

562 U.S. 1054, 131 S. Ct. 616,

178 L. Ed. 2d 454,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8863.

November 15, 2010.

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

Justice Breyer took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 378 Fed. Appx. 950.
<PAGE>

                                EATON CORPORATION
                         2007 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
                                   ITEM 15(B)
                                  EXHIBIT 32.1
                                  CERTIFICATION

This written statement is submitted in accordance with Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. It accompanies Eaton Corporation's Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 ("10-K Report").

I hereby certify that, based on my knowledge, the 10-K Report fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C 78m), and information contained in the 10-K Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Eaton Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries.


Date: February 26, 2008                 /s/ Alexander M. Cutler
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Alexander M. Cutler
                                        Chairman and Chief Executive Officer;
                                        President
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SS. 1350)

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss. 1350),
the undersigned, Corey M. Horowitz, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of
Network-1 Security Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), does
hereby certify to his knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report of Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 of
the Company (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Act of 1934, and the information contained in the
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.





/S/ COREY M. HOROWITZ
-----------------------------------------------
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHAIRMAN
NOVEMBER 14, 2005
Order filed February 14 , 2014.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 13

- 00730

- CV

____________ HUA XU , Appellant

V.
DAVID K. LAM, AKA KA PUN LAM, KA P. LA M, DAVID LAM, KAPUN LAM, INDIVIDUALLY AN D JIA TIAN AKA ANGEL A TIAN , Ap pellee s

On Appeal from the 189th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2010

- 79571



### ORDER
The reporter’s record in this case was due September 17, 2013

. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1. On September 30, 2013 , this court ordered the court reporter to file the record within 30 days. The record was not filed. On October 31, 2013 the court granted Amanda King’s motion for extension of time to file the record until November 17, 2013 . The record was not filed. On December 13, 2013 , this court2

ag ain ordered the court reporter to file the record within 30 days. On January 17,
2014 this court granted Amanda King’s second motion for extension of time to
file the record until February 7, 2014 , noting that no further extensions would be granted absent exceptional circumstances

. The record has not been filed with the court. Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely as ordered, we issue the following order.

We order Amanda King, the official court reporter, to file the record in this appeal on or before March 3, 2014. If the record is not filed as ordered, the court will consider ordering a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the
record.

PER CURIAM
##### 



(SAEL)State of New JerseyDEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICESDIVISION OF MEDICAL ASSISTANCE AND HEALTH SERVICESJON S. CORZINE
    
    P.O. Box 712
    
    JAMES W. SMITH, JR.Governor
    
    Trenton, NJ 08625-0712
    
    Acting CommissionerTelephone 1-800-356-1561ANN CLEMENCY KOHLERDirectorJuly 18, 2006
  
     Sincerely,Jill Simone, MDExecutive DirectorOffice of Managed Health Care
 EnclosureJS:
    
    H:vc:
    
    John KoehnJennifer Langer
 New Jersey Is An Equal Opportunity Employer




---



##### 



STATE OF NEW JERSEY
 DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
 DIVISION OF MEDICAL ASSISTANCE AND HEALTH SERVICES
 AND
 AMERIGROUP NEW JERSEY, INC.
 AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE HMO SERVICES
  Appendix, Section C, Capitation Rates




---



##### 



AMERIGROUP
    
    
    
    State of New JerseyNew Jersey, Inc.
    
    
    
    Department of Human ServicesBY:
    
    /s/ [ILLEGIBLE]
    
    
    
    BY:
    
    Ann Clemency KohlerTITLE:
    
    President and CEO
    
    
    
    TITLE:
    
    Director, DMAHSDATE:
    
    7/25/06
    
    
    
    DATE:APPROVEDAS TO FORM ONLYAttorney General State of New
JerseyBY:
    
    Deputy Attorney GeneralDATE:




---



##### 








---



##### 



STATE OF NEW JERSEY
 SFY 2007
MANAGED CARE CAPITATION RATES
AND MANAGED CARE SERVICES ADMINISTRATOR FEES
 Contract Period: 07/01/2006 - 06/30/2007Category
    
    Age/Sex
    
    
    Northern
    
    
    Central
    
    
    Southern
    
    
    StatewideAFDC/KidCare A/New Jersey Care ChildrenAFDC/KidCare A/New Jersey Care ChildrenAFDC/KidCare A/New Jersey Care Children/NJCPWAFDC/ NJCPWAFDCAFDC/ NJCPWAged with MedicareBlind/Disabled with Medicare and Other Dual EligiblesBlind/Disabled with Medicare and Other Dual Eligibles
    
    *******REDACTED*******MaternityABD-DDD with Medicare and Other Dual EligiblesABD
(including AIDS & DDD) without Medicare  non-DDDABD
(including AIDS & DDD) without Medicare  DDD &Non ABD-DDDDYFSDYFSDYFSKidCare B&CKidCare B&CKidCare B&CKidCare DKidCare DKidCare DFamilyCare
Parents 0-133%FamilyCare Parents 0-133%FamilyCare Parents 0-133%FamilyCare Parents 134-200%FamilyCare Parents 134-200%FamilyCare Parents 134-200%AIDS-ABD with Medicare and Other Dual EligiblesAIDS-Non-ABDAIDS-ABD
with Medicare and Other Dual Eligibles DDD (including Behavioral Health Add-On)AIDS-Non-ABD DDD (including Behavioral Health Add-On)