alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Clear All

        13 November 2023    

                    USNS Trenton Visits Port of Oran, Algeria on a Friendship Stopover                 
                The civilian and naval crew of the USNS Trenton are honored to visit theport city of Oran from November 7 to 9 on a friendship stopover, as a showof continued U.S. partnership and goodwill with the People's DemocraticRepublic of Algeria. The visit marks the first time a U.S. naval vessel hasvisited            

        30 August 2022    

                    USNS Trenton (T-EPF 5) completes Gulf of Guinea deployment                 
                MALAGA, Spain - The Spearhead-class expeditionary fast transport USNS Trenton (T-EPF 5) arrived in Malaga, Spain following a two month deployment to the Gulf of Guinea, Aug. 28, 2022.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
Order entered November 23, 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 15 - 01438 - CR CHRISTOPHER HOWARD B EACHUM, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F - 1355206 - W



### O RDER Before the Court is the State’s November 22, 2016 second motion for extension of time in which to file its brief. The motion is GRANTED . The State’s brief, whi ch accompanied its motion, is deemed timely filed as of the date received.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS PRESIDING JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Summary Financial Data Schedule contains summary financial information
extracted from Balance Sheet,  Statement of Cash Flows, Statement of Operations
and Notes thereto incorporated in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-QSB and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          52,761
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  188,133
<ALLOWANCES>                                   168,580
<INVENTORY>                                     88,193
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               497,667
<PP&E>                                          46,564
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 636,401
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          453,755
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,375
<OTHER-SE>                                     182,646
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   636,401
<SALES>                                        264,876
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               264,876
<CGS>                                           41,193
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   41,193
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               331,933
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (108,250)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (108,250)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.02)


</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Stella Radgowski, Deceased. Stephen P. Radgowski, as Executor of Stella Radgowski, Deceased, Appellant; New York State Tax Commission, *831Respondent.

In a proceeding to determine the amount of net New York State tax to be paid by an estate, Stephen P. Radgowski, as executor of the estate of Stella Radgowski, deceased, appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Richmond County (D’Arrigo, S.), dated August 22, 1986, which, upon the appeal of the New York State Tax Commission, pursuant to Tax Law § 249-x, modified a prior pro forma order of the court, dated October 9, 1985, which had, *inter alia,*fixed the net State estate tax, by increasing the amount due from $3,135.49 to $5,505.73.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs payable by the appellant executor personally.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the pro forma order dated October 9, 1985, which had fixed the net State estate tax was not res judicata as between the parties *(see,*Tax Law § 249-x; *Matter of Ford,*198 Misc 69, *mot to dismiss appeal granted*278 App Div 1029; *Matter of McNeil,*53 Misc 2d 677; *see also, Matter of Scrimgeour,*175 NY 507). Specifically, the October 9, 1985 pro forma order was based upon a tax return submitted by the executor and not "pleadings framing issues”; it "was granted and entered without even a semblance of a determination of any of the present questions as *issues*before the court at that time” *(see, Matter of Ford, supra,*at 76). Accordingly, after the executor apparently ignored the letters from the New York State Tax Commission, challenging the amount of net State estate tax reported on the return, and requesting that the executor submit an amended pro forma order to the Surrogate’s Court, the Commission could properly seek review of the pro forma order dated October 9, 1985, in the Surrogate’s Court on the ground that the State estate tax return was false and incomplete *(see,*Tax Law § 249-x; *see also, Matter of McNeil, supra).*

We have considered the appellant’s other argument and find it to be without merit. Lawrence, J. P., Weinstein, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
Clear All

        19 March 2024    

                    Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Celebrates EPA Superfund Site Delisting                 
                KITTERY, ME - In an historic milestone, after nearly 30 years of extensive remediation, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) deleted Portsmouth Naval Shipyard (PNSY) from the National Priorities List (NPL), more commonly known as the Superfund Site list.            

        09 February 2023    

                    USS Leyte Gulf (CG 55) Sailors Volunteer in Crete, Greece                 
                NAVAL SUPPORT ACTIVITY SOUDA BAY, Greece - Sailors assigned to the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Leyte Gulf (CG 55) participated in two community relations (COMREL) events during their stay in Souda Bay, Greece, helping the local community while enjoying some of Greece’s            

        24 January 2023    

                    Five Species on San Clemente Island Declared Fully Recovered                 
                NAVAL BASE CORONADO, Calif. - Decades of collaborative conservation efforts on U.S. Navy-owned San Clemente Island resulted in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's announcement today that five species - San Clemente Island paintbrush, lotus, larkspur and bush-mallow plants and San Clemente Bell's            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Harry E. Bohart, III, Appellant.

Casey, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Crew, III, J.), rendered November 19, 1986, in Chemung County, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of assault in the first degree.

On October 15, 1986, defendant waived his right to all pretrial procedures and entered a plea of guilty to the first count of the indictment, charging assault in the first degree, in full satisfaction thereof. The indictment contained an additional charge of reckless endangerment. On November 19, 1986, defendant was sentenced to an indeterminate prison term of 6 to 12 years and, in addition, was ordered to make restitution in the amount of $4,225 to the victim of the crime.

Defendant claims on this appeal that the restitution order was imposed after an off-the-record discussion with the probation officer only, and without compliance with Penal Law § 60.27 (2) and CPL 400.30. The prosecution contends that defendant waived his rights under those two statutes by failing to challenge or contest the order of restitution at the time of sentence and by failing to attack the order in a CPL 440.20 motion.

The amount of restitution was calculated by Supreme Court after an off-the-record discussion with the probation officer, *964and was based upon the victim’s loss of 91 working days at an annual salary of $11,050 and damage to his vehicle. We find this method of calculation legally insufficient to support the determination of the amount of restitution, notwithstanding the purported waiver of the hearing by defendant’s failure to request it *(see, People v Dixon,*134 AD2d 877; *People v Miller,*133 AD2d 784, *lv denied*70 NY2d 934). Therefore, the judgment appealed from should be modified by vacating the order of restitution, and the matter remitted for a hearing on the proper amount of restitution and the manner of payment.

Judgment modified, on the law, by reversing so much thereof as ordered restitution; matter remitted to the Supreme Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this court’s decision; and, as so modified, affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.
# C_2009145EN.01001101.xml

| 25.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 145/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 145/11

---

Final report of the Hearing Officer in Case COMP/M.4980 — ABF/GBI Business (1)

1

2009/C 145/08

On 22 February 2008, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 and following a referral pursuant to Article 22 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (‘EC Merger Regulation’) by which the undertaking Associated British Foods plc (‘ABF’, United Kingdom) acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the EC Merger Regulation, control over a number of subsidiaries and assets of GBI Holding BV, certain assets and stakes of GB Ingredients BV and DSM Bakery Ingredients BV (together ‘the GBI Business’, the Netherlands) by way of purchase of assets and shares.

In order for the Commission to be able to dismiss any possible serious doubts, ABF submitted a remedy proposal on 26 March 2008.

After examination of the notification and market testing of the remedy proposal, the Commission concluded on 16 April 2008 that the notified operation raised serious doubts as to its compatibility with the common market and the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘EEA Agreement’). The Commission therefore initiated proceedings in accordance with Article 6(1)(c) of the EC Merger Regulation.

Upon request, ABF was given access to the key documents in the file, in accordance with the Best Practices rules for merger cases, in the form of a selection of non-confidential versions of third parties' replies to the phase-one requests for information; these were provided to the notifying party on 23 April and 30 April 2008.

On 10 July 2008, the Commission sent an Article 11(3) decision to ABF and subsequently suspended the time limits effective 26 June 2008. This suspension ended on 16 July 2008.

On 10 July 2008, ABF offered a draft alternative remedy with a view to rendering the concentration compatible with the common market and committed to pursue both alternatives in parallel. A new draft and a final version of the commitments were submitted on 15 July and 23 July 2008, respectively.

The Commission has concluded that the commitments, as submitted on 23 July 2008 would remove the significant impediment to effective competition in the compressed yeast markets in Portugal and Spain. Accordingly, no statement of objections was sent to the notifying party and the concentration is to be declared compatible with the common market and the EEA Agreement pursuant to Article 2(2) of the Merger Regulation, subject to compliance with the commitments in the annex to the decision.

No queries or submissions have been made to me by the parties or any third party. The case does not call for any particular comments as regards the right to be heard.

Brussels, 15 September 2008.

Michael ALBERS

---

(1)  Pursuant to Articles 15 and 16 of Commission Decision (2001/462/EC, ECSC) of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing Officers in certain competition proceedings — OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21.

1

---
Case 1:07-cv-01542-AKH Document 18 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-01542-AKH Document 18 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05486-KMW Document 9 Filed 03/14/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05486-KMW Document 9 Filed 03/14/2008 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7906

WILLIAM COLUMBUS SMITH,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief

District Judge. (CA-04-557-5-FL)

Submitted: April 14, 2005 Decided: April 20, 2005

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Columbus Smith, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

William C. Smith appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000).

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. See Smith v. Stansberry, No. CA-04-557-5-FL (E.D.N.C.

Oct. 28, 2004). 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.

AFFIRMED
#### PETER SINCLAIR *v.*HARTFORD ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION ET AL.

The petition by the proposed intervenor Roger J. Frechette for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court (AC 25889) is denied.

*932
      *Roger J. Frechette,*in support of the petition.

*William F. Gallagher*and *Thomas McNamara,*in opposition.

Decided April 21, 2005
Ryder Scott Company
Petroleum Consultants

1100 Louisiana                                         Fax (713) 651-0849
Suite 3800  Houston, TX  77002-5218              Telephone (713) 651-9191






                      CONSENT OF PETROLEUM CONSULTING FIRM




      We consent to the  reference to our name included in this Annual Report on
Form  10-K  for  the  year  ended December 31, 2000 for Dyco Oil and Gas Program
1978-1 Limited Partnership.



                                    //s// Ryder Scott Company, L.P.

                                    RYDER SCOTT COMPANY, L.P.






Houston, Texas
January 31, 2001
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                            5755
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                            3296
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      32415
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         233860
<ALLOWANCE>                                       1796
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  283536
<DEPOSITS>                                      180010
<SHORT-TERM>                                     17900
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                833
<LONG-TERM>                                      11519
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            54
<OTHER-SE>                                       73220
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  283536
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  14999
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                 1660
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   195
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 16854
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                5404
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                6026
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            10828
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      144
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   2
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                   5362
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   5753
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        5753
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      3839
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.74
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.70
<LOANS-NON>                                       3299
<LOANS-PAST>                                       337
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   494
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  1728
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       86
<RECOVERIES>                                        10
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                 1796
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              1796
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         4,425,000
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         4,040,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    26,078,000
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         3,397,000
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           3,417,000
<LOANS>                                        89,127,000
<ALLOWANCE>                                    1,216,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 131,441,000
<DEPOSITS>                                     115,731,000
<SHORT-TERM>                                   0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            730,000
<LONG-TERM>                                    1,005,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       602,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     13,373,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 131,441,000
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                1,820,000
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              452,000
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               2,272,000
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             1,078,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,128,000
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          1,144,000
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  53,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                             0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                97,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                438,000
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     438,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   289,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.16
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 7.65
<LOANS-NON>                                    1,341,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                285,000
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               1,163,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  15,000
<RECOVERIES>                                   15,000
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              1,216,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           1,216,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                            0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        0


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 1, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 21749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-10770]



[[Page 21749]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Chicago Operations Office; Notice of Financial Assistance 
Solicitation Availability

AGENCY: Chicago Operations Office, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of financial assistance solicitation availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy is announcing its intent to invite 
applications from small businesses and institutions of higher education 
and development for the Cooperative Automotive Research for Advanced 
Technologies (CARAT) Program. This annual solicitation seeks innovative 
research and development in the following seven (7) topic areas: TOPIC 
1--Alternative (Non-Lithium) Insertion Electrode Battery Technology; 
TOPIC 2--Non-Carbon Anodes for Lithium-ion Batteries; TOPIC 3--Fuel 
Cells for Auxiliary and Portable Power; TOPIC 4--Homogeneous-Charge 
Compression-Ignition (HCCI) Enabling Technology; TOPIC 5--Cost-
Effective, High-Efficiency Porous Media Heat Transfer; TOPIC 6--Cost-
Effective, High-Efficiency Materials for Thermoelectric Devices; and 
TOPIC 7--Cost-Effective, High-Efficiency Integrated Systems Approach to 
Auxiliary Electric Motors.

DATES: The complete solicitation document will be available on or about 
April 27, 2001. The deadline for the submission of applications will be 
identified in the solicitation.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the solicitation, when issued, can be obtained 
from the DOE Chicago Operations Office, Acquisition and Assistance Home 
Page at http://www.ch.doe.gov/business/ACQ.htm under the heading 
``current solicitations'', Solicitation No. DE-SC02-01EE50657.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Earlette Robinson, 630/252-2667.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Preapplications will be due approximately 
two-weeks after on the release of the solicitation. Please note that 
users will not be alerted when the solicitation is issued on the 
Internet.

    Issued in Argonne, Illinois on April 20, 2001.
John D. Greenwood,
Assistant Manager for Acquisition and Assistance.
[FR Doc. 01-10770 Filed 4-30-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P