alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
We offer the following as our comments on Water Quality Standards revision:

First, a disclaimer: We make laser diffraction instruments for particle sizing in water. Our instruments are widely used internationally, and recently became Required instruments by EPA as part of the Gulf oil droplet monitoring on ships, as example. http://www.epa.gov/bpspill/dispersants/subsurface

- dispersant

- directive

- final.pdf

Our Comments:

1. Water Quality Standards should now require particle size distribution information (PSD). PSD is of fundamental importance in processes of transport of particles by flows and against settling;

2. PSD is central to pollutant transp ort by attachment of toxics to particle surfaces;

3. It is time to abandon the nephelometric standards for monitoring particulate content. Dozens, if not hundreds, of scientific papers attest to the fundamental error in relating nephelometric turbidi ty to suspended particle concentration. Only laser diffraction technology offers correct estimates of suspended particle size distribution and concentration, rooted fundamentally in the physics of light scattering.

4. Laser diffraction technology is ready and available for measurements of PSD.

5. The technology is accepted by ISO as standard no. ISO 13320:2009; and by Amer.

Water Works Assoc. as standard no. 2560D.

6. PSD information can also be used to identify specific pollutant specie s for purposes of public health safety.

Thank you.

Yogi

Dr. Yogesh C Agrawal, PhD

President/Senior Scientist Sequoia Scientific, Inc. 2700 Richards Rd, #107 Bellevue, WA 98005 Tel: (425)641

- 0944 ext 106 Fax:(425)643

- 0595 http://www.sequoiasci.com
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

JAN 19, 2010

JOHN LEY

ACTING CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 09-13688

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 08-02165-CV-BE-M

KATHY AMOS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Alabama

________________________

(January 19, 2010)

Before BARKETT, HULL and COX, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

On October 14, 2008, Kathy Amos filed this lawsuit against Hartford Life and

Accident Insurance Company (“Hartford”) in Alabama state court. The single-count
complaint alleged that Hartford breached a group disability insurance policy (“the

Policy”) by “wrongly terminat[ing]” Amos’s benefits under the Policy. (Record

Excerpts 1-1.) Hartford removed the case to the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Alabama because Amos’s claim arises under the Employee

Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq.

On Hartford’s motion, the district court dismissed Amos’s complaint with

prejudice, finding that her claim was barred by a contractual limitation of action

provision in the Policy. In the same order, the district court denied Amos’s motion

for remand to the plan administrator so that Hartford could consider medical records

that it had not considered previously, finding that remand was inappropriate because

the limitations period had expired. Amos appeals the dismissal and denial of remand.

After review of the briefs and record, we affirm. The district court properly

held that the three-year limitations period in the Policy is enforceable and, even if it

was tolled while administrative remedies were pursued, Amos’s suit was filed after

the limitations period expired. And, we agree with the district court that remand for

further consideration by the plan administrator is not appropriate under these

circumstances.

AFFIRMED.

2
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Patch International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending August 31, 2004, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
David Stadnyk, President, Secretary and Treasurer (Principal Executive and
Financial Officer) of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


/s/ DAVID STADNYK
--------------------------------------
David Stadnyk
President, Secretary and Treasurer
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
1236 CAF 16-00369 PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., CARNI, CURRAN, TROUTMAN, AND SCUDDER, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF ANDREW R. SABOL AND VICKI J. SABOL, PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS,
V ORDER
PAULA G. IANNELLO, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

PETER J. DIGIORGIO, JR., UTICA, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
WILLIAM H. GETMAN, WATERVILLE, FOR PETITIONERS-RESPONDENTS.
JOSEPH M. CIRILLO, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILDREN, MOHAWK.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Herkimer County (Anthony J. Garramone, J.H.O.), entered September 22, 2015 in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6. The order, among other things, granted petitioners visitation with the subject children. It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in the decision at Family Court.

Entered: December 23, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT (12)

Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges

Year ended December 31,2010

2009

2008

2007

2006Income before provision for income taxes and fixed charges (Note A)

$
125,706,453

$
114,457,760

$
108,185,260

$
91,690,922

$
99,409,515Fixed Charges:Interest on long-term debt

$
41,958,541

$
42,084,023

$
36,040,957

$
31,120,122

$
25,947,191Interest on short-term debt


630,913


1,124,883


1,853,682


2,940,317


2,275,939Interest on trust preferred securities


2,089,583


4,250,000


4,250,000


4,250,000


4,250,000Other interest


(2,332,530
)

(680,863
)

1,152,588


1,069,206


1,029,135Rental expense representative of an interest factor (Note B)


5,430,863


6,501,484


6,040,062


4,686,748


4,798,490Total fixed charges

$
47,777,370

$
53,279,527

$
49,337,289

$
44,066,393

$
38,300,755Ratio of earnings to fixed charges


2.63


2.15


2.19


2.08


2.60


NOTE
A:    For the purpose of determining earnings in the calculation of the ratio, net income has been increased by the provision for income taxes, non-operating income taxes
and by the sum of fixed charges as shown above.

NOTE
B:    One-third of rental expense (which approximates the interest factor).

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 23

KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Consent of Independent Auditors

The Board of Directors
EDO Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.2-69243,
33-1526 and 33-28020 on Form S-8 of EDO Corporation of our report dated
February 13, 1997, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of EDO
Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996 and 1995 and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1996, which
report appears in the December 31, 1996 annual report on Form 10-K of EDO
Corporation.

KPMG PEAT MARWICK LLP

Jericho, New York
March 18, 1997
Exhibit 31.4

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Oliver R. Stanfield, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to annual report on Form 10-K/A of Echelon Corporation; and

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.



|                     |  |  |  |                     |  |                                                                                                                                                           
|-------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                     |  |  |  | ECHELON CORPORATION
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 11, 2010 |  |  |  | By:                 |  | /s/ Oliver R. Stanfield                                                                                                                                   
|                     |  |  |  |                     |  | Oliver R. Stanfield, Executive Vice President Finance and Chief Financial Officer (Duly Authorized Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
# C_2013147EN.01002702.xml

| 25.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 147/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 147/27

---

Action brought on 21 March 2013 — Benelli Q.J./OHIM — Demharter (MOTOBI)

(Case T-170/13)

2013/C 147/49

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Benelli Q.J. Srl (Pesaro, Italy) (represented by: P. Lukácsi, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Demharter GmbH (Dillingen, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Alter the defendant’s decision and order the dismissal of the application for revocation filed by the cancellation applicant; |
| --- | --- |

—

Alter the defendant’s decision and order the dismissal of the application for revocation filed by the cancellation applicant;

| — | Annul the defendant’s decision and remit the case to OHIM for further examination and a new decision should the Court consider that it is inevitable to conduct another thorough analysis of the evidence of genuine use; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the defendant’s decision and remit the case to OHIM for further examination and a new decision should the Court consider that it is inevitable to conduct another thorough analysis of the evidence of genuine use;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the applicant’s costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which an application for revocation has been made: The word mark ‘MOTOBI’ for goods in class 12 — Community trade mark registration No 835 264

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which an application for revocation has been made:

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Proprietor of the Community trade mark:

Party applying for revocation of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Party applying for revocation of the Community trade mark:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Revoked the Community trade mark

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---
Exhibit 32.1
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
In connection with the Annual Report of Educational Development Corporation(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending February 29, 2004, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Randall W. White, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.        Date: May 25, 2004       By  /s/ Randall W. White   Randall W. White   President and Chief Executive Officer   
In connection with the Annual Report of Educational Development Corporation(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending February 29, 2004, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, W. Curtis Fossett, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuantto 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.        Date: May 25, 2004 By /s/ W. Curtis Fossett   W. Curtis Fossett   Chief Financial Officer
No. 10-636.

#### Leslie Dewayne Allen, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1110, 131 S. Ct. 841,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9801.

178 L. Ed. 2d 560,

December 13, 2010.

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

Same case below, 619 F.3d 518.
Exhibit 4.7









Exhibit 4.7

 

NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AWARD

APPLIED DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

 

RESTATED TO REFLECT THE REVERSE STOCK SPLIT AS OF APRIL 5, 2004

 

Name of Option Recipient: J. Michael Norris




On January 12, 2004, the Company awarded you a stock option. You were granted an option to buy 22,500 Shares of the Common Stock at the price of $4.50 per share on or after January 12, 2006, and on or before January 12, 2013 (the "Option Expiration Date"). 




IMPORTANT: By signing below, you agree to be bound by, and acknowledge receipt of, the attached Terms and Conditions of this Non-Qualified Stock Option Award. Furthermore, although this option is not being awarded to you pursuant to the Applied Digital Solutions, Inc., 2003 Flexible Stock Plan (the “Plan”), the rules and terms of the Plan shall be incorporated herein and apply to your option as if it were being granted under the Plan (except to the extent the Plan conflicts with this letter, in which case, this letter shall govern).

  

                                    APPLIED DIGITAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

 

                                    /s/ Kay E. Langsford-Loveland

                                    Kay E. Langsford-Loveland 

                                    Vice President, Administration

 

Read and agreed to this 

3 day of June, 2004

/s/ J. Michael Norris

J. Michael Norris
# C_2015398EN.01002303.xml

| 30.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/23

---

Order of the President of the Second Chamber of the Court of 16 July 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — Fadil Cocaj v Bevándorlási és Állampolgársági Hivatal

(Case C-459/14) (1)

1

(2015/C 398/31)

Language of the case: Hungarian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 7, 12.1.2015.

1

---
# C_2014024EN.01002402.xml

| 25.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/24

---

Action brought on 28 October 2013 — Bimbo v OHIM — Cafe' do Brasil (KIMBO)

(Case T-568/13)

2014/C 24/43

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Bimbo, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: N. Fernández Fernández-Pacheco, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Cafe' do Brasil SpA (Melito di Napoli, Italy)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 28 August 2013 given in Cases R 636/2012-4 and R 608/2012-4; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 28 August 2013 given in Cases R 636/2012-4 and R 608/2012-4;

| — | Order the intervener to pay the costs of proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the intervener to pay the costs of proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘KIMBO’ for goods and services in Classes 11, 21, 30, 32 and 43 — Community trade mark application No 3 420 973

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The applicant

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: The Spanish trade marks No 291 655, No 451 559 and No 2 244 563

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in part

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 8(1)(b) and 8(5) CTMR.

Pleas in law:

---
No. 10-6572.

#### Robert Monterrosa, Petitioner v. Jeff Premo, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary.

562 U.S. 1033, 131 S. Ct. 588,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8764.

178 L. Ed. 2d 421,

November 8, 2010.

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

Same case below, 384 Fed. Appx. 619.
# From Ship to Ship: Replenishment at Sea

/ Published Sept. 14, 2016
AT SEA -- Marines and Sailors with the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit and the Bonhomme Richard Expeditionary Strike Group participated in a replenishment at sea in the Pacific Ocean, Sept. 12, 2016.A RAS is an aerial resupply mission which moves food and essential supplies packaged on pallets from a Navy supply vessel to other underway ships via a rope suspended beneath a Navy MH-60S Seahawk. The hours-long flight operations allow Marines and Sailors to work side by side to replenish the ship’s stores before continuing with the BHR ESG’s fall patrol of the Asia-Pacific region.“Through vertical replenishment using aircraft, supplies are delivered onto the flight deck,” said Sgt. Benjamin Seidle, an avionics technician with Marine Medium Tiltrotor Squadron 262 (Reinforced), the Aviation Combat Element for the 31st MEU.The RAS also allows the ships of the BHR ESG to off-load used supplies, such as non-biodegradable waste.“Whatever needs to be sent out is removed from ship using external hooks attached to the aircraft,” Seidle said.Once supplies are delivered to the flight deck, they are lowered via an aircraft elevator for Marines and Sailors below to un-package, sort and deliver necessities across the ship and into freezers for future use.For the Marines, a hard day’s work moving boxes and equipment is worth the reward, according to Lance Cpl. Bjorn Larson, a motor transport mechanic with Battalion Landing Team, 2nd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, the 31st MEU’s Ground Combat Element.“The RAS is about getting the supplies you need on ship – the bonus is you get cookies and brownies, too,” Larson said.The 31st MEU is the Marine Corps’ only continuously forward-deployed Marine Air-Ground Task Force, and combines air-ground logistics into a single team capable of addressing a range of military operations in the Asia-Pacific region – from force protection and maritime security to humanitarian assistance and disaster relief in cooperation with host countries and partner militaries. 
*Editor's note: The original story can be viewed on the U.S. Pacific Command website.*
#### People v Barnes

4th Dept: 139 AD3d 1371 (Ontario)

denied 8/2/16 (Abdus-Salaam, J.) (Appeal No. 1)
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
                
                Defense Logistics Agency
                        The Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency
                    DLA
            Search
                        Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                            Search
                    Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                        Search
    Home

    What DLA Offers
    
        Excess Property Disposal

    Document Services

    Products

    Services

    Programs

    Working With DLA
    
        Applications

    Small Business

    Federal and International Cataloging

    Defense Data Standards

    Events

    Procurement Policies

    Government Programs

    Forms

    Organizations
    
        DLA Headquarters

    DLA Aviation

    DLA Disposition Services

    DLA Distribution

    DLA Energy

    DLA Land and Maritime

    DLA Troop Support

    DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM

    DLA Europe & Africa

    DLA Indo-Pacific

    Customer Support
    
        Self Help Tools

    How to Order

    Find Your Order

    Customer Facing Offices

    Training

    Brochures

    Warfighter Support

    Customer Service Management

    Careers

    About DLA
    
        Contact Us

    Locations

    Leaders

    News

    History

    Media Gallery

    DLA Campaigns  Home
  Land and Maritime
  About
  DLA Land and Maritime Image Galleries
 DLA Land and Maritime images
 Supply Chain Alliance and Exhibition
 DLA Land and Maritime News
 Hall of Fame Ceremonies
 DSCC Activities
 DLA Land and Maritime Hall of Fame ceremonies
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.76 MB)
 
 #DLALandandMaritim #BGGailAtkins #Hall of Fame #hof23
 Photo Gallery
 2024 DLA Supply Chain Alliance Conference and Exhibition Image Gallery
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.76 MB)
 
 #DLALandandMaritim #BGGailAtkins #Hall of Fame #hof23
 Photo Gallery
 DLA Land and Maritime news
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.76 MB)
 
 #DLALandandMaritim #BGGailAtkins #Hall of Fame #hof23
 Photo Gallery
 DSCC activities
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.76 MB)
 
 #DLALandandMaritim #BGGailAtkins #Hall of Fame #hof23
 Photo Gallery
 Contact UsSite IndexStrategic PlanDLA IG HotlineFOIANo FEAR ActWhistleblower ProtectionDLA CareersImagesWebmasterEEOSection 508Public AffairsSAPRExternal Links DisclaimerDOD Information Quality GuidelinesPrivacy/SecurityUSA.govDOD Web PolicyDOD Open GovernmentPlain Language
                    Stay Connected
            
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
No. 10-7449.

#### Rogelio L. Valenzuela-Lopez, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1116, 131 S. Ct. 841,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9778,

178 L. Ed. 2d 571,

December 13, 2010.

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

Same case below, 375 Fed. Appx. 665.