alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## Breadcrumb

-  Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center  

#           Eyes on Earth Episode 56 – Modeling the Past to Plan for the Future      

      By Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center 

## Eyes on Earth

Get every episode

-  Home 
-  Science 
-  Data 
-  Multimedia 
-  Publications 
-  Web Tools 
-  News 
-  Connect 
-  Partners 
-  About 

Eyes on Earth is a podcast on remote sensing, Earth observation, land change and science, brought to you by the USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center. In this episode, we learn how scientists built a map of pre-Colonial land cover in the U.S.

View Media Details

View

Download and Transcript Access

View Media Details

**Summary:** Mapping land cover in the United States in the present isn’t a simple job, but satellites like Landsat make it possible. Mapping conditions in the pre-satellite era, which the LANDFIRE program does through its Biophysical Settings (BpS) GIS data products, is a far trickier proposition. BpS essentially offer a spatially-explicit map of pre-Colonial land cover in the U.S., alongside models that help scientists understand how landscapes re-grow and recover after disturbances. On this episode of Eyes on Earth, we learn how LANDFIRE went about creating its BpS datasets and the value they hold for land managers and fire scientists.

**Guests:** Kori Blankenship, Fire Ecologist and Spatial Analyst, The Nature Conservancy

**Host:** John Hult

**Producer:** John Hult

**Release date:** August 9, 2021

**More on Biophysical Settings**
                            - Vegetation dynamics models: a comprehensive set for natural resource assessment and planning in the United States
                            - LANDFIRE website
                            - LANDFIRE Viewer
                            - Eyes on Earth Episode 30 – Remapping LANDFIRE
                            - Eyes on Earth Episode 51 – LANDFIRE 2019 Limited

### Contacts

#### Timothy A. Glynn

##### Chief of Staff

Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center 

tglynn@usgs.gov

605-594-6046

### Eyes on Earth

                        -  -             Eyes on Earth
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 19, 2010 

s1118 

Order 

 

November 19, 2010 

142024 & (28) 

ADIA BLACKSHER, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

and 

McLAREN MEDICAL CENTER, 

 Intervening Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 142024 

 COA: 299611 

Genesee CC: 08-089055-NF 

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE 

INSURANCE COMPANY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, a stipulation signed by counsel for the parties 

agreeing to the dismissal of this application for leave to appeal is considered, and the 

application for leave to appeal is DISMISSED with prejudice and without costs.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

# AGENCY:

Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Notice of reporting requirements submitted for OMB review.

# SUMMARY:

                        Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), agencies are required to submit proposed reporting and recordkeeping requirements to OMB for review and approval, and to publish a notice in the                         **Federal Register**                         notifying the public that the agency has made such a submission.                    

# DATES:

Submit comments on or before June 11, 2001. If you intend to comment but cannot prepare comments promptly, please advise the OMB Reviewer and the Agency Clearance Officer before the deadline.

# COPIES:

Request for clearance (OMB 83-1), supporting statement, and other documents submitted to OMB for review may be obtained from the Agency Clearance Officer.

# ADDRESSES:

Address all comments concerning this notice to: Agency Clearance Officer, Jacqueline White, Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20416; and OMB Reviewer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jacqueline White, Agency Clearance Officer, (202) 205-7044.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

*Title:*                     Financing Eligibility Statement-Social Disadvantaged-Economic Disadvantaged.                

*No's:*                     1941A, 1941B, 1941C.                

*Frequency:*                     On Occasion.                

*Description of Respondents:*                     SBA Businesses seeking financing from Specialized Small Business Investment Companies (SSBIC).                

*Annual Responses:*                     293.                

*Annual Burden:*                     586.                

Jacqueline White,

Chief, Administrative Information Branch.

[FR Doc. 01-11930 Filed 5-10-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     9
<CIK>                         0001046001                          
<NAME>                        DELAWARE FIRST FINANCIAL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                        JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      7,324
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      7,177
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 2,551
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            0
<LOANS>                                    82,278
<ALLOWANCE>                                   504
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             96,538
<DEPOSITS>                                 64,042
<SHORT-TERM>                                4,500
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                         2,897
<LONG-TERM>                                 8,698
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          12
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                        0
<OTHER-SE>                                 16,390
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             96,538
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             1,581
<INTEREST-INVEST>                             143
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            1,724
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                            761
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            974
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                         749
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  15
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                               556
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               217
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    217
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  126
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                0.11
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                               3.22
<LOANS-NON>                                   188
<LOANS-PAST>                                    0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               11
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                               854
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                              489
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   0
<RECOVERIES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                             504
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                          343
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                             0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                       161
                                           


</TABLE>
M A N D A T E

TO THE 94TH DISTRICT COURT of NUECES COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, on the 3rd day of

September, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

Gulf Coast Division, Inc. and Bay

Area Healthcare Group, Ltd.,

Appellants,

v.

Group & Pension Administrators, Inc. Appellee.

CAUSE NO. 13-14-00608-CV (Tr.Ct.No. 2014-DCV-3130-C)

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on

appeal, concludes the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and rendered in

part and remanded in part. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court REVERSED

and RENDERED IN PART and REMANDED IN PART for further proceedings

consistent with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellee.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

      

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals

for the Thirteenth District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things have it duly

recognized, obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Rogelio Valdez, Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals, with the seal

thereof affixed, at the City of Edinburg, Texas this 30th day of November, 2015.

Dorian E. Ramirez, CLERK

FILE COPY
Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 10 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 10 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 2 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 10 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 3 of 4Case 1:07-cv-05295-AKH Document 10 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 4 of 4
Clear All

        18 April 2022    

                    USS The Sullivans Returns Home After Back-to-Back Deployments                 
                JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS The Sullivans (DDG 68) returned to Naval Station Mayport after a three-month deployment to the European theater of operations, April 18.            

#####  

##### 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
BOARD OF DIRECTORS COMPENSATION PLAN



 Exhibit 10.24 
  
 

 
  
 Board of Directors
Compensation Plan 
  
 Adopted September 24,
2002; Modified June 26, 2003, July 21, 2005, December 15, 2005 
  
 Cash Compensation – All Participating Directors*: 
  
 $25,000 annual retainer, payable in equal quarterly installments. 
  

$2,000 meeting fee for each regular or special Board of Directors meeting attended. 
  
 Cash Compensation – Participating Directors Serving on Standing Committees: 
  
 $15,000 annual fee to the chairperson of the Audit and Compliance Committee,
payable in equal quarterly installments. 
  
 $1,000 committee
meeting fee for each regular or special standing Board committee meeting attended as a committee member, not held in conjunction with a regular or special Board of Directors meeting. 
  
 $1,000 additional committee meeting fee to the chairperson of each standing Board committee for each regular or special
standing Board committee meeting attended as chairperson, whether or not held in conjunction with a Board meeting. 
  
 Stock Options – All Participating Directors: 
  
 Each Participating Director will receive awards of non-qualified stock options under the Plan as follows: 
  
 Initial. 10,000 shares on the first business day following date of
first election to the Board of Directors; and 
  
 Annual.
4,000 shares on the next business day following each annual meeting of stockholders (other than the annual meeting of stockholders at which the director is initially elected as a director). 
  
 Each such Participating Director stock option will have an exercise price no
less than 100% of fair market value on date of award and will expire on the earlier of 10 years from date of award or one (1) year after the holder ceases to serve on the Board of Directors. Initial awards will be immediately vested and
exercisable. Annual awards will vest and be exercisable 25% each year for four years on the anniversary date of award. 
  
 Other – All Directors: Reimbursement of travel expenses incurred for meeting attendance. 
  

	 	


  

	 	*	All Non-Employee Directors (as such term is defined in the Corporation’s 1999 Stock Option and Restricted Stock Purchase Plan), other than Norman C. Payson, M.D.
Exhibit 32 Certification required under Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



                         CERTIFICATION
                         _____________

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

The undersigned, being the President and Chairman of the Board of
Pismo Coast Village, Inc., do hereby certify, in compliance with
Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code,
that the periodic report which this Certification accompanies
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15 (d)
of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in said periodic report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operation of the issuer.

Date: November 8, 2008                 JERALD PETTIBONE
                                       Jerald Pettibone
                                          President


<PAGE>


Exhibit 32 Certification required under Section 906 of the
           Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



                         CERTIFICATION
                         _____________

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

The undersigned, being the chief financial officer of Pismo Coast
Village, Inc., do hereby certify, in compliance with Title 18,
Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that the
periodic report which this Certification accompanies fully
complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in said periodic report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of
operation of the issuer.

Date: November 8, 2008                  JACK WILLIAMS
                                        Jack Williams
                                    Chief Financial Officer

<PAGE>
**EXHIBIT 15**

August8, 2006

***Securities and Exchange Commission100 F Street, N.E.Washington, D.C. 20549***

Commissioners:

We are aware that ourreport dated August 8, 2006 on our review of interim financial information ofW. R. Grace & Co. (the “Company”) for the three-month and six-month periodsended June 30, 2006 and June 30, 2005 and included in the Company’s QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, is incorporated byreference in its Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-37024,333-49083, 333-49507, 333-49509, 333-49511, 333-49513, 333-49515 and333-49517).

Very truly yours,

*/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLPPricewaterhouseCoopers LLPMcLean, Virginia*

 

----
Case 1:07-cv-05398-AKH Document 15 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05398-AKH Document 15 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*AMIR BROOKS

*James M. Fox,*special public defender, in support of the petition.

*Elizabeth M. Moseley,*special deputy assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided April 27, 2005

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 88 Conn. App. 204 (AC 24902), is denied.
(August 19, 1987)

#### Virginia M. Croce, Respondent, v Anthony S. Votta et *186al., Respondents, and Patrick A. Mahoney, Appellant.

a proceeding to invalidate a petition designating Anthony S. Votta, and, upon his declination, Patrick A. Mahoney, as a candidate in the Conservative Party primary election to be held on September 15, 1987, for the public office of County Legislator, 11th Legislative District, in the County of Suffolk, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Geiler, J.), dated August 5, 1987, which, upon reargument, adhered to its prior determination granting the application.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the proceeding is dismissed and the Suffolk County Board of Elections is directed to place the name of the appellant Patrick A. Mahoney on the appropriate ballot *(see, Solowitz v Selleck,*133 AD2d 187 [decided herewith]). Mollen, P. J., Mangano, Thompson, Lawrence and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
Case 1:07-cv-04521-AKH Document 39-2 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-04521-AKH Document 39-2 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-04521-AKH Document 39-2 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 3 of 3
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 9 I 0 2 89

. SAMUEL PRI OR v . THE STATE.

Sam u el Pri o r s e e k s i m

m ed i at e rev i ew o f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er d en y i n g h i s

m o ti o n t o su p p res s t h e res u l t s o f a s t at e-ad m i n i s t e r e d b r e at h t es t. Al o n g wi t h h i s

ap p li cat io n , Pri o r has s u b m i tt ed a cert i fi cat e o f i m m ed i at e rev i ew s i g ned b y a

d i fferen t ju d g e t h an t h e on e wh o s i g ned t h e den i al o rd er. In l i g h t o f t h i s u n ex p l ai n ed

d i s crep an cy , we l ack ju ri s d ict i o n t o co ns i d er t h e ap p l i cat i on

. Un d er OCGA § 5 -6- 34 (b ), a p art y m ay ap p l y fo r i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p el l at e rev i ew

“ [w] h ere t h e t r i a l

j u d g e i n ren deri ng an o rd er, d eci s i o n , o r ju d gm en t , n o t o t h erwi s e

s u b ject t o d i rect ap p eal

, . . . cert i fi es wi t h i n t en d ay s of en t ry th ereo f t h at t h e o rd er,

d eci s i o n , o r ju d g m en t i s of s u ch i m po rt an ce t o t h e cas e t h at i m m ed i at e rev i ew s h o u ld

b e h ad .” (Em

p h as i s s u p p l i e d

. ) By i t s t erm s , t h e s t at u t e req u i res t h e cert i fi cat e o f

i m m ed i at e rev i ew t o b e s i gn ed by “ t h e t ri al ju d g e,” n o t b y a d i fferen t ju d g e. H ere, t h e

d en ial o rd er was s i g n ed b y J ud g e J as o n B. Th o m p s on , bu t t he cert i fi cat e o f i m m ed i at e

rev i ew was s ig n ed b y “ T. Ky l e Ki n g, J u d g e, Pro Hac.” N o t h i n g i n t h e a p p l i cat i o n

m at eri al s ex pl ai n s wh y J u dg e Ki n g s i g n ed t h e cert ifi cat e i n s t ead o f J u d g e Th o m p s o n,

o r i n d i cat es t hat J u d g e Ki n g was “ t he t ri al ju dg e” wh en h e di d s o. Co m pare Ho u r in

v. S t a te

, 3 0 1 Ga. 8 3 5

, 8 3 7 (1 ) (8 0 4 SE2 d 3 8 8 ) (2 0 1 7 ) ( e v i d en ce s h o wed t h at ju d g e

wh o s i g n ed u n d erl y i ng o rd er w as act i n g p u rs u an t to an as s ig n m e n t o r d e r t h at h ad

ex p ired

, an d j ud ge wh o s i gn ed cert i fi cat e was n o w “ t h e t ri al ju d g e” fo r t h e p u rp o s e

o f OCGA § 5 -3 4 (b )). August 01, 2019Becau s e Pri o r’ s cert i fi cat e o f im m ed i at e rev i ew do es n o t co m p l y wi t h OCGA

§ 5 -6 -3 4 (b ), t h i s ap p l i cat i o n i s h ereb y D ISM ISSED. See Ma u er v. Pa r ker F i b er n et

, LLC , 3 0 6 Ga. Ap p. 1 6 0 (7 0 1 SE2 d 5 9 9 ) (2 01 0 ).

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y th a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 08/01/2019
Case 1:07-cv-05305-AKH     Document 7      Filed 09/06/2007     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:07-cv-05305-AKH     Document 7      Filed 09/06/2007     Page 2 of 2
##### 



Exhibit 21
Subsidiaries of Applica Incorporated The following companies are direct or indirect wholly owned subsidiaries of Applica Incorporated: Name of Subsidiary
    
    Jurisdiction of Incorporation1.
    
    WD Delaware, Inc.
    
    Delaware2.
    
    Windmere Holdings Corporation
    
    Delaware3.
    
    HP Intellectual Corp.
    
    Delaware4.
    
    Applica Consumer Products, Inc.
    
    Florida5.
    
    Sandgate Services Limited
    
    Hong Kong6.
    
    HP Delaware, Inc.
    
    Delaware7.
    
    PPC Industries Ltd.
    
    British Virgin Islands8.
    
    Household Products Chile Comercial Limitada
    
    Chile9.
    
    Applica de Colombia Limitada
    
    Colombia10.
    
    Applica de Venezuela, C.A.
    
    Venezuela11.
    
    HP (BVI) Limited
    
    British Virgin Islands12.
    
    Applica Americas, Inc.
    
    Delaware13.
    
    HPG LLC
    
    Delaware14.
    
    Applica Canada Corporation
    
    Nova Scotia15.
    
    Applica Mexico Holdings, Inc.
    
    Delaware16.
    
    Corporacion Applica de Centro America, Ltda.
    
    Costa Rica17.
    
    Remdale Investments Limited
    
    British Virgin Islands18.
    
    Durable Electric Limited
    
    Hong Kong19.
    
    Applica Asia Limited
    
    Hong Kong20.
    
    Maanring Holding B.V.
    
    Netherlands21.
    
    Tofino Investment Limited
    
    British Virgin Islands22.
    
    Applica Manufacturing, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    
    Mexico23.
    
    Applica de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    
    Mexico
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Samuel Cortez, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered March 4, 1985, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for *841leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Lawrence, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.