alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
News United States Air Force
 QF-16 takes flight at Holloman AFBPublished Feb. 17, 2017
                        
                        By Senior Airman Emily Kenney
                        
                        
                        49th Wing Public Affairs
                **HOLLOMAN AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. (AFNS)  --**
                The QF-16 drone took its first flight at Holloman Air Force Base Feb. 10, 2017. The manned sortie was the first for the QF-16 at Holloman AFB since the retirement of the QF-4 Phantom in 2016. “The first flight is significant because it is the first step for us in standing up the QF-16 program,” said Lt. Col. Ronald King, the commander of Detachment 1, 82nd Aerial Targets Squadron. “Manned flying is critical in our development of the remote control and unmanned mission capabilities necessary for us to provide QF-16 full-scale aerial targets to our Defense Department and foreign military sales customers.” The upgrade to the QF-16 allows customers to test weapons systems in real-world scenarios before reaching the battlefield.   “Our mission stays the same,” King said. “However, the QF-16 increases the capabilities we can offer our customers. The QF-16 is a fourth-generation fighter, while the QF-4 was a third-generation fighter. The QF-16 offers more realistic threat replication in performance, maneuverability and capabilities.” The QF-16 can fly manned or unmanned, depending on the mission and customer’s needs. “Our flying missions at Holloman are driven by our customer's requirements,” King said. “Sometimes, when a system is brand new, we may just be flying straight and level with no maneuvers. As a system matures, the complexity of the missions will increase to test and validate the new system.” The 82nd ATRS is part of the 53rd Weapons Evaluation Group at Eglin AFB, Florida. The group provides the personnel and infrastructure to test and evaluate weapons utilized by the combat air forces of the U.S. and its allies. It operates the only full-scale aerial targets in the DOD. In accordance with U.S. law, Title 10, Section 2366 of the U.S. Code, a missile system must undergo lethality testing before it can enter full-scale production. The 82 ATRS maintains DOD’s sole capability to execute the Title 10 requirement with full-scale aerial targets.QF-16 



ACC 



Holloman AFB
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:* National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Initial Review Group; Reproduction, Andrology, and Gynecology Subcommittee.

*Date:* October 15, 2010.

*Time:* 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.

*Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications.

*Place:* Legacy Hotel and Meeting Center, 1775 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

*Contact Person:* Dennis E. Leszczynski, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5b01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-2717, *leszczyd@mail.nih.gov*.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 94.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: August 30, 2010.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-22100 Filed 9-2-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### HYLTON v. KOONTZ

No. 296P00-2

Case below: 138 N.C. App. 629

Petition by defendant (Medical Park Hospital, Inc.) for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 2 January 2001.
Filed 3 / 7 / 23 P. v. Ehens CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

M ATTHEW L EROY EH ENS

,

Defendant and Appellant. 2d Crim. No. B 3 22838 (Super. Ct. No. 19F

- 0 5786 ) ( San Luis Obispo County)

M atthew Leroy Eh ens appeals a restitution order imposed
following his plea of nolo contendere to torture with personal use
of a deadly w eapon, and elder abuse with the infliction of great
bodily injury and personal use of a deadly weapon

. (Pen. Code,
§ § 206, 12022, subd. (b)(1), 368, subds. (b)(1) & (2), 12022.7, subd.
(c).)
Evidence presented at the preliminary examination

disclosed t hat on August 2, 2019, Ehens argued with his 79

- year

old foster mother. He then threw hot oil on her face and stabbed

her in the back with a kitchen knife.2 On August 25, 2021, Ehens waived his trial rights, pleaded

nolo contendere to the torture and el der abuse counts, and
admitted the personal weapon use and great bodily injury
allegations. Ehens also agreed to pay specific amounts of

restitution to his foster mother, the California Victim
Compensation Board, and a property owner whose landscape he

da maged during his flight from the scene. Pursuant to a plea

agreement , the trial court sentenced Ehens to eight years to life
for the torture and personal weapon use enhancement, and
stayed sentence for the elder abuse and related enhancements.

The court also found that Ehens did not have the present
financial ability to pay certain fines and therefore did not impose

them.

We appointed counsel to represent Ehens in this appeal.
After counsel’s examination of the record, he filed an opening
brief raising no issues.
On January 12, 2023, we advised Ehens that he had 30
days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues
that he wished to raise on appeal. We have not received a

response.
We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied tha t

Ehens ’s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and
that no arguable issue exists. ( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d
436, 441.)3 We affirm the judgment.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

GILBERT, P. J.

We concur:

YEGAN , J.

BALTODANO

, J.4 Jacquelyn H. Duffy, Judge

Teresa Estrada

- Mullaney , Judge *

Superior Court County of San Luis Obispo

______________________________

Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of

Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plainti ff and Respondent.

* (Retired Judge of the San Luis Obispo Sup. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.)
EXHIBIT 10.6


ROKWADER, INC.


(a
delaware corporation)


 


Assignment Agreement and Addendum to Assignment Agreement between Dillonpark, LLC and Latigo Shore Music,
Inc. dated January 24, 2013 and May 7, 2013, respectively. 


 


Please refer to
the accompanying document in pdf format: exhibit_10-6.pdf
Exhibit 10.23


 


	
        University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences

        4301 West Markham Street #632

        Little Rock, AR 72205-7199
	


 


	WBowes@uams.edu	 
	 	William R. Bowes, CFO
	Phone (501) 686-5671	Vice Chancellor for
	FAX (501) 686-8137	Finance & Administration


 


May 16, 2014


 


Sam Riccitelli

Signal Genetics, LLC

667 Madison Avenue 14th Floor

New York, NY 10065


 


Dear Mr. Riccitelli,


 


The purpose of this letter agreement is to state the terms under
which the Board of Trustees of the University of Arkansas acting for and on behalf of the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
("UAMS") and Signal Genetics, LLC will act regarding the "Reference Laboratory Services Agreement" and the
"Reference Laboratory Services Agreement for Research Specimens" both effective on March 21, 2011, and amendment. The
agreements and amendment are attached for your reference. These two agreements were extended on March 20, 2014 for sixty (60) days
until May 20, 2014 in order to allow time for new agreements to be prepared and executed. UAMS intends to continue receiving services
from Signal Genetics, LLC, and believes it is in its best interest to continue receiving the laboratory services in accordance
with the agreements for the next ninety (90) days during which time new and current agreements can be prepared and executed between
the parties.


 


Therefore, the parties agree that the terms of the aforementioned
agreements shall remain in full force and effect for the next ninety (90) days. The parties further agree that the agreements entered
into on March 21, 2011 and extended to May 20, 2014, shall be extended again by an additional 90-day period.


 


If this letter agreement correctly reflects the terms agreed
to by Signal Genetics, LLC, please sign a copy of this agreement in the space provided below and return it by facsimile to the
facsimile number of UAMS stated above and by overnight courier to the address of UAMS stated above, in each case to the attention
of William R. Bowes.


 


Respectfully,


 


	/s/ William R. Bowes	5-16-14	 	/s/ Sam Riccitelli	5-19-14
	William R. Bowes	Date	 	Sam Riccitelli	Date
	Vice Chancellor for Finance & Administration	 	Signal Genetics, LLC
News United States Air Force
 Balancing work, life strengthens identityPublished May 23, 2016
                        
                        By Maj. Naomi Henigin
                        
                        
                        60th Force Support Squadron
                **TRAVIS AIR FORCE BASE, Calif. (AFNS) --**
                As the Air Force focuses on resiliency for our Airmen and their families, concepts like work-life balance are given renewed consideration. The health benefits of maintaining a balance between our career identity and our "true self," the one typified by the activities we engage in outside of work, has led to special attention on finding the happy medium.Members of the military have one of the strongest work identities forged through shared experiences starting in basic military training and continuing through deployments, routine missions, daily life in a common uniform and speaking a common language. For those who serve, our work identity is so closely tied to our "true self" that the lines between work and everything else become blurred. Our friends and our colleagues are one in the same; we live mere steps from the office and we devote so much of ourselves to the mission that its success becomes a singular driving force in our lives.And we like it that way. We love our profession, and we are what makes us the world's premier fighting force.That love and that drive for the Air Force, however, can overtake our "true self." When we lose what makes each of us unique and strong individually in the pursuit of our common mission, the entire organization will suffer. We all must find a balance in how we pursue professional excellence, while remaining true to our other identities.For many of us, that balance is in being a parent; for others, it's being a friend, a sibling, a child. It might be connected to a hobby. For some, it's all of those things -- and in the end it doesn't matter. The "life" in work-life balance is whatever you do outside of work, and it's important.If there is any question as to the weight the Air Force places on work-life balance, consider the Diversity and Inclusion and Force of the Future policy initiatives our Air Force leadership have implemented in the last year. Programs targeted at recruiting and retaining America's best and brightest are demonstrating that there is more to being an Airman than just work. The life part of that balance is critically important to ensuring that we achieve and maintain a margin of excellence.We will never attain a perfect 50/50 balance between work and home life, but we as Airmen should strive to find an equilibrium that allows us to perform at our best. The Air Force is making room for it. As hard as it may be to slow our own personal ops tempo down, it's critical to the success of the mission.For me personally, being a good mother, wife, friend, and athlete takes time away from my squadron, but that side of my identity is an important source of strength and resiliency. By spending some time on those aspects of my life, I am undoubtedly a better Airman at work.resiliency 



Travis AFB 



commentary
EX-4.7.5



 Exhibit 4.7.5 

CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT 
 PURSUANT
TO SECTION 3807(e) OF THE DELAWARE STATUTORY TRUST ACT 
 (12 Del. C. § 3801 et seq.) 

THIS Certificate of Amendment is being duly executed and filed on behalf of each Delaware statutory trust (collectively, the
“Trusts”) for which BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware, a Delaware banking corporation (the “Trustee”), acts as trustee at White Clay Center, Route 273, Newark, Delaware 19711, by the undersigned, as trustee, to amend the respective
Certificates of Trust of the Trusts pursuant to Section 3807(e) of the Delaware Statutory Trust Act (12. Del. C. § 3801 et seq.) (the “Act”). 

1. Amendment of Certificates of Trust. The Certificate of Trust of each of the Trusts is hereby amended by changing the address of the
Trustee in the State of Delaware set forth therein from White Clay Center, Route 273, Newark, Delaware 19711, to 100 White Clay Center, Suite 102, Newark, Delaware 19711. 

2. Effective Date. This Certificate of Amendment shall be effective immediately upon filing. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate as of December 30, 2009, in accordance with Section 3807(e)
of the Act. 
  

					
	 BNY MELLON TRUST OF DELAWARE,
 not
in its individual capacity but solely as trustee of the Trusts

		
	By:	 	 /s/ Kristine K. Gullo

		 	Name:	 	Kristine K. Gullo
		 	Title:	 	Vice President
| 1.   | Access      Digital Media, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary      of the Company. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | Core      Technology Services, Inc., a New York corporation and a wholly-owned      subsidiary of the Company. |
|----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3.   | Hollywood      Software, Inc., d/b/a AccessIT Software, a California corporation and a      wholly-owned subsidiary of theCompany. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4.   | FiberSat      Global Services Inc., d/b/a AccessIT Satellite and Support Services, a      Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of the      Company. |
|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5.   | ADM      Cinema Corporation, d/b/a The Pavilion Theatre, a Delaware corporation and      a wholly-owned subsidiary of theCompany. |
|----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 6.   | PLX      Acquisition Corp. a Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of      Hollywood Software, Inc. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 7.   | Christie/AIX,      Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Access      Digital Media, Inc. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 8.   | UniqueScreen      Media Inc., d/b/a AccessIT Advertising and Creative Services, a Delaware      corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of the  Company. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 9.   | Vistachiara      Productions Inc., d/b/a The Bigger Picture, a Delaware corporation and a      wholly-owned subsidiary of theCompany. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 10.   | Access      Digital Cinema Phase 2, Corp., a Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned      subsidiary of Christie/AIX, Inc. |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 11.   | Vistachiara      Entertainment, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary      of theCompany. |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
### MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 1 1

- 00 625

- CV

EX PARTE Michael WUDTEE

Original Habeas Corpus Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 21, 2011

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS DENIED

On August 26, 2011, relator filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, complaining

Sheriff Amadeo Ortiz has failed to give him “good time” credit during his 180 day confinement

after being held in contempt for failure to pay child support. However, a relator is not entitled to

habeas corpus relief unless he was deprived of his liberty without due process of law, or if we

conclude the judgment ordering him confined is void. See In re Alexander , 243 S.W.3d 822, 824

(Tex. App.

— San Antonio 2007, orig. proceeding). Relator has failed to meet his burden to show

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2001

- CI

- 01410 , in the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas,

the Honorable Cathy Stryker presiding.04

- 11

- 00625

- CV

- 2

- he is entitled to habeas corpus relief. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is

DENIED.

PER CURIAM
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D19-1330

_____________________________

OSCAR GREY TURBERVILLE,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Belated Appeal—Original Jurisdiction.

June 18, 2019

PER CURIAM.

The petition for belated appeal is dismissed as untimely. See

Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c)(5)(A).

ROWE, MAKAR, and KELSEY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Oscar Grey Turberville, pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


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 Nayna Networks, Inc. (formerly ResCon
      Technology Corp.), on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006,
      as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      "Report"), the undersigned, Naveen S. Bisht, Principal Executive 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, as amended; and





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




*Date:
                May 15, 2007*
            By:
            /s/ *Naveen
              S. Bisht**Naveen
                S. Bisht,*
              *Principal
                Executive Officer*