alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2014015EN.01001802.xml

| 18.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 15/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 15/18

---

Order of the General Court of 14 November 2013 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case T-284/13 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Civil service - Action dismissed at first instance as manifestly inadmissible - The application lodged by fax and the original subsequently received not the same - Original application lodged out of time - Action out of time - Appeal manifestly unfounded)

2014/C 15/27

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Gattinara, Agents, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal against the order of the Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union (Third Chamber) of 11 March 2013 in Case F-17/12 Marcuccio v Commission, not published in the ECR, seeking to have that order set aside.

Marcuccio

Commission

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Mr Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission in the appeal proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mr Marcuccio is ordered to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission in the appeal proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       9,028,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               49,225,000
<ALLOWANCES>                               (1,507,000)
<INVENTORY>                                 93,228,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           165,311,000
<PP&E>                                     475,525,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             145,680,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             531,069,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      123,586,000
<BONDS>                                    388,880,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       149,000
<OTHER-SE>                                (60,749,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               531,069,000
<SALES>                                    409,169,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           409,169,000
<CGS>                                      307,193,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              307,193,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             1,295,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          51,364,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (195,677,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                              (14,004,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (181,673,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                              39,470,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            (6,793,000)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                             (148,996,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (10.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (10.05)


</TABLE>
# Disposition Services completes CONUS transition to WMS

/ Published Jan. 10, 2024
BATTLE CREEK, Mich., 
For Defense Logistics Agency Disposition Services personnel in Alabama, 2024 kicks off with a major transition as the Anniston site becomes just the latest to adopt DLA’s modern Warehouse Management System.

Over the course of the past year, the agency has rolled out WMS capabilities at both DLA Disposition Services and DLA Distribution sites across the continent. The Anniston go-live marks the first time one geographic location will activate WMS for both major sub-commands simultaneously.

“This is the first time that we have done that throughout this entire project,” said Liberty Moore, WMS project lead. “The [demilitarization] center will be down for about two weeks during the training period, so this is going to be a huge impact to our customers.”

Customers are still able to turn property in during this down period, but all items will be placed in a “hold” status until the transition and training is completed on January 22. This major undertaking affects the site employees as well as its customers as the Anniston team has a unique set of missions.

“Anniston has three distinct missions – two of which are only done in Anniston in the receipt of small arms parts and receipt of weapons,” said Disposition Services Area Manager Pat Leverett.  “Anniston does have some seasoned employees who have help develop WMS from start to finish. We will lean on those employees to serve as the SME’s during this transition period and bring everyone down to the same playing field,” said Leverette.

Anniston WMS activation marks the completed adoption of WMS for all DLA Disposition Services sites in the continental U.S. Becky Watson directs the agency’s property disposal efforts across the South-East directorate that includes Anniston, and she said her regional team looks forward to taking advantage of the technological advances and efficiencies this new system should bring.

“We will be better able to properly account for property in an auditable fashion, and adoption gets us up to speed with the other CONUS sites,” said Watson.

Moore and the WMS training team have compiled lessons learned during training and adoption events at each site and carry those forward, helping to improve each go-live event. She said she has personally seen the compounding positive effects of those lessons.

“I am really happy to see how our agency has embraced the change and how we have had such strong collaboration between the field and headquarters to ensure that we are getting processes down right,” said Moore.

Adoption of WMS across the entire global network of DLA property disposal sites is projected to wrap up in May.
No. 10-519.

#### Craig Allen Irwin, Petitioner v. North Dakota.

562 U.S. 1092, 131 S. Ct. 802,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9586.

178 L. Ed. 2d 532,

December 6, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of North Dakota denied.

Same case below, 785 N.W.2d 245.
No. 10-7041.

#### Jaime Trevino, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

562 U.S. 1144, 131 S. Ct. 915,

178 L. Ed. 2d 764,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 501,

January 10, 2011.

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

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2729 

To discontinue a Federal program that authorizes State and local law enforcement officers to investigate, apprehend, and detain aliens in accordance 

with a written agreement with the Director of U.S. Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement and to clarify that immigration enforcement is 

solely a function of the Federal Government. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 14, 2019 

Mr. QUIGLEY (for himself, Ms. JAYAPAL, Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Mr. 

GARCI ́A of Illinois, and Ms. GARCIA of Texas) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To discontinue a Federal program that authorizes State and 

local law enforcement officers to investigate, apprehend, 

and detain aliens in accordance with a written agreement 

with the Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and to clarify that immigration enforcement 

is solely a function of the Federal Government. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting the Rights 

5 Of Towns against federal Enforcement contrary to ConVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:13 May 25, 2019 Jkt 034408 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2729.IH H2729

pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2729 IH

1 stitutional Tenets for Immigration Act of 2019’’ or as the 

2 ‘‘PROTECT Immigration Act of 2019’’. 

3 SEC. 2. RESCISSION OF STATE AND LOCAL IMMIGRATION 

4 ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY. 

5 Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality 

6 Act (8 U.S.C. 1357(g)) is amended to read as follows: 

7 ‘‘(g) Except as provided in paragraph (10) of section 

8 103(a), in section 274(c), and in section 439 of the 

9 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 

10 (8 U.S.C. 1252c), the authority to inquire about or verify 

11 immigration or citizenship status and to investigate, ap12 prehend, arrest, or detain an individual for a violation of 

13 this Act or any regulation authorized by this Act is re14 stricted to immigration officers and authorized employees 

15 of the Department of Homeland Security and subject to 

16 limits set forth in other provisions of law.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
No. 10-467.

#### Marc Winkler, Petitioner v. Matthew Grant, et al.

562 U.S. 1124,131 S. Ct. 823,

178 L. Ed. 2d 579,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9793.

December 13, 2010.

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

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

Same case below, 370 Fed. Appx. 145.
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD 

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell. 

Estimated Costs: 

Action 

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement) 

Do not include oncondition costs here 

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance) 

Work-hours 

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up) 

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our) 

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts) 

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered 

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet 

Modification of 

TAE 125-02 

engines on 

Cessna 172 aircraft

3.0 $ 255.00 $285 $ 540.00 13 $7,020.00

Modification of 

TAE 125-02 

engines on DAI 

DA 42 aircraft

3.0 $ 255.00 $206 $ 461.00 84 $38,724.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance: 0

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $45,744 

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $45,744

On-Condition Costs:

Action 

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement) 

Work-hours 

(include access, 

testing, and closeup) 

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour) 

Parts Cost Cost per Product 

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 
 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): 

Executive Order 12866: 

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act: 

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: 

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6320

JOSEPH FREDERICK MOORE,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

H. R. POWELL, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, District Judge.

(CA-97-595-3)

Submitted: August 27, 1998 Decided: September 17, 1998

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Frederick Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998), as untimely filed. Appellant’s conviction became final

before April 24, 1996, the effective date of the Antiterrorism and

Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. On August 5, 1997, Appellant

filed a § 2254 petition. The district court denied relief because

Appellant filed his petition outside the one-year limitation period

imposed by 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244(d) (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). See

Brown v. Angelone, ___ F.3d ___, Nos. 96-7173, 96-7208, 1998 WL

389030 (4th Cir. July 14, 1998) (holding that petitioner had until

April 23, 1997, in which to file a timely petition). Because

Appellant filed his § 2254 petition after April 23, 1997, and because his second state post-conviction petition did not toll the

limitation period, we find that the petition was untimely filed.

See 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244(d)(1), (2). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Appellant’s motion to expedite the

appeal as moot, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Tips From Former Smokers Tips 2019/TV

Dana/TV ”Impact on Family” :30

The spot opens on the Tips From A Former Smoker’s Daughter logo and cuts to a shot of Dana sitting 

next to a hospital bed and speaking to the patient, Terrie.

DANA: She’s been diagnosed with a brain tumor. 

The spot cuts to Dana and we see text on screen that says she is Terrie’s daughter. 

DANA: She’s done very well, you know, for the last several months, and now we’re just back at 

square one again. 

We see footage of Terrie in the hospital bed and the doctor is speaking with her and cut between 

shots of a very emotional Dana speaking to camera. 

DANA: It’s very difficult for the family because you too go through everything that they go through.

Maybe not in the same way, but you’re still there. 

The spot cuts to the art card, which reads “Smoking caused Terrie’s cancer and her death.”

ANNCR: You can quit. For free help, visit CDC.GOV/TIPS.

ART CARD: You can quit. For free help, visit CDC.GOV/TIPS. CDC LOGO

SPONSORED BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES.

#CDCTIPS
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 10, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27092-27093]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11229]

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

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

Public Availability of the National Endowment for the Humanities 
FY 2010 Service Contract Inventory

AGENCY: National Endowment for the Humanities.

ACTION: Notice of Public Availability of FY 2010 Service Contract 
Inventories.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 743 of Division C of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-117), the National 
Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) is publishing this notice to advise 
the public of the availability of the FY 2010 Service Contract 
inventory. This inventory provides information on service contract 
actions over $25,000 that were made in FY 2010. The information is 
organized by function to show how contracted resources are distributed 
throughout the agency. The inventory has been developed in accordance 
with guidance issued on November 5, 2010 by the Office of Management 
and Budget's Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). OFPP's 
guidance is available at

[[Page 27093]]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/procurement/memo/service-contract-inventories-guidance-11052010.pdf. NEH has posted its 
inventory and a summary of the inventory on the NEH Web site: http://www.neh.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barry Maynes in the Administrative 
Services Office at 202-606-8233 or bmaynes@neh.gov.

    Dated: May 4, 2011.
Michael P. McDonald,
General Counsel and Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-11229 Filed 5-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7536-01-P
```
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 129 (Tuesday, July 7, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17916]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Meeting

    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) of 
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces the 
following meeting.

    Name: Laboratory Evaluation of Novel Personal Heat Strain 
Monitors in Young and Older Wearers of Protective Clothing.
    Time and Date: 1 p.m.-3:30 p.m., July 21, 1998.
    Location: NIOSH, CDC, Room H-203, 1095 Willowdale Road, 
Morgantown, WV 26505.
    Status: Open to the public, limited only by the space available. 
The meeting room accommodates approximately 35 people.
    Purpose: Participants will provide NIOSH with their individual 
advice and comments regarding the technical and scientific aspects 
of the study protocol, A Laboratory Evaluation of Novel Personal 
Heat Strain Monitors in Young and Older Wearers of Protective 
Clothing, being conducted at NIOSH. Participants on the peer review 
panel will review the study protocol and provide individual advice 
on the conduct of this study. Viewpoints and suggestions from 
industry, labor, academia, other governmental agencies, and the 
public are invited.
    Contact Person for Additional Information: Nina L. Turner, 
NIOSH, CDC, M/S 35, 1095 Willowdale Road, Morgantown, West Virginia, 
26505-2888, telephone 304/285-5976.

    Dated: June 30, 1998.
Carolyn J. Russell.
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention (CDC).
[FR Doc. 98-17916 Filed 7-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-19-P
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Three-Five Systems, Inc. (the Company)
for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, James E Jurgens, Interim Chief 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:  (3)
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(4)
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. /s/ James E. JurgensJames E. JurgensInterim Chief Financial Officer
 Date: April 1, 2005
EXHIBIT 11.1
                                 ESPEY MFG. & ELECTRONICS CORP.
                            Computation of per Share Net Income as
                               Disclosed in Item 14 of Form 10-K

                                Five years ended June 30, 2005
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                2005        2004        2003        2002        2000
                             ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------  ----------
<S>                           <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>
Computation of net income
     per share:

         BASIC
         Weighted average
         number of primary
         shares outstanding   1,010,617   1,013,663   1,025,200   1,030,556   1,031,403
                             ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========

Net income ................  $  978,920  $  960,826  $  964,700  $  545,754  $1,033,069
                             ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========

Per share-basic ...........  $      .97  $      .95  $      .94  $      .53  $     1.00
                             ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========
         DILUTED
         Weighted average
         number of primary
         shares outstanding   1,021,604   1,022,344   1,027,686   1,034,904   1,033,989
                             ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========

         Net effect of
         dilutive stock
         options based on
         treasury stock
         method ...........      10,987       8,681       2,486       4,348       2,586
                             ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========

Net income ................  $  978,920  $  960,826  $  964,700  $  545,754  $1,033,069
                             ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========

Per share-diluted .........  $      .96  $      .94  $      .94  $      .53  $     1.00
                             ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========  ==========
</TABLE>



29