alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
News United States Air Force
 Airmen feedback critical to future Air ForcePublished March 12, 2018
                        
                        
                        Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS)  --**
                Select total force Airmen will be chosen to participate in one of two surveys supporting the Invisible Wounds Initiative. 
The 2018 IWI Culture Assessment Survey and the 2018 Invisible Wounds Needs Assessment are confidential, voluntary surveys that will take approximately 20 minutes to complete. 
Feedback received from the IWI Culture Assessment will enable an understanding of the culture surrounding invisible wounds which includes post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injuries and other cognitive, emotional or behavioral disorders associated with trauma experienced by an individual. This will assist the IWI in developing strategies to improve the perceptions of invisible wounds within the Air Force and increase the support Airmen receive.  
Air Force leaders will also understand Airmen’s non-medical supportive needs from the Invisible Wounds Needs Assessment which will enable the IWI to provide Airmen with a smoother road to recovery and increase resiliency via peer-led support groups.
“Optimizing human performance is critical to the future of our Air Force,” said Michelle Padgett, director of warrior wellness and policy integration. “Information collected from these surveys will play a key role in guiding the policies and processes the Air Force implements to support Airmen with invisible wounds and ensure they are treated with the honor, dignity and respect they deserve.” 
Airmen selected to participate in one of the surveys will receive a direct email from the IWI with a link to participate.wellness 



future 



support 



post-traumatic stress disorder 



trauma 



traumatic brain injury 



assessment 



invisible wounds 



Invisible Wounds Initiative 



feedback
#### LYNNE HERBIG STEG v. BRIAN DAVID STEG

No. 354PA00

(Filed 6 April 2001)

On writ of certiorari pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-32(b) of orders entered by the Court of Appeals on 8 August 2000, denying defendant’s petition for writ of supersedeas and defendant’s petition for writ of certiorari to review an order for contempt entered by Abernethy, J., on 26 July 2000 in District Court, Catawba County. Heard in the Supreme Court 13 March 2001.

*Morrow Alexander Task Kurtz & Porter, by John F. Morrow; and W. Wallace Respess, Jr., for plaintiff-appellee.*

*Crowe & Davis, P.A., by H. Kent Crowe, for defendant-appellant.*

PER CURIAM.

WRIT OF CERTIORARI IMPROVIDENTLY ALLOWED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            14780
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         10821
<OTHER-SE>                                     (25601)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   600
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (600)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (600)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
#### JOSE RAMOS v. BROWNING FERRIS INDUSTRIES OF SOUTH JERSEY, INC. v. LAMINATING CORPORATION OF AMERICA.

February 11, 1985.

Cross-petition for certification granted.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19A0756. MAURICE DEWAYNE BROWN v. THE STATE. 

Charged with possession of methamphetamine, possession of marijuana, and

obstruction of an officer, Maurice Dewayne Brown filed a motion to suppress the

drugs found on him. At the subsequent hearing, the trial court denied the motion, but

no order was entered.

1 Thereafter, Brown filed a motion for reconsideration, which

was denied on March 16, 2018. Brown obtained a certificate of immediate review on

March 23, and filed a notice of appeal on March 29, 2018. We lack jurisdiction over

this direct appeal.

An order denying a motion to suppressis not a final appealable decision within

the meaning of OCGA § 5-6-34 (a). Moreover, the denial of a motion for

reconsideration is not itself directly appealable, and the filing of such a motion does

not extend the time for filing an appeal. See Bell v. Cohran, 244 Ga. App. 510, 510-

511 (536 SE2d 187) (2000); Savage v. Newsome, 173 Ga. App. 271, 271-272 (326

SE2d 5) (1985); see also Mayor & Aldermen of City of Savannah v. Norman J. Bass

Const. Co., 264 Ga. 16, 17 (1) (441 SE2d 63) (1994) (holding that an order denying

a motion for reconsideration “can be the subject of an application for interlocutory

appeal”). Accordingly, Brown was required to follow the interlocutory appeal

procedure outlined in OCGA § 5-6-34 (b) by obtaining a certificate of immediate

1 An oral order is not appealable unless it is reduced to writing, signed by the

judge, and filed with the clerk. OCGA § 5-6-31; Boynton v. Reeves, 226 Ga. 202,

202-203 (173 SE2d 702) (1970); Sharp v. State, 183 Ga. App. 641, 642 (1) (360 SE2d

50) (1987).

December 13, 2018
review from the trial court within ten days and filing a timely application for

interlocutory review in this Court. See OCGA § 5-6-34 (b); Court of Appeals Rule

30. Although Brown obtained a certificate of immediate review, his failure to apply

for and obtain an order from this Court granting him the right to file a direct appeal

deprives this Court of jurisdiction. 

For these reasons, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

12/13/2018
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. DAVID A. STUCKS.

July 23, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 31.2


      I, Arie Hinkis,  President and Chief Financial Officer of Voice Diary Inc,
certify  that this  annual  report on Form  10KSB of Voice  Diary  Inc.  and the
financial  statements  contained  herein fully comply with the  requirements  of
Section  13(a)  or  15(d)  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of  1934  and  that
information  contained in this periodic report fairly presents,  in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the company.

Dated: April 13, 2004


                                         /s/ Arie Hinkis
                                         -------------------------------------
                                         Arie Hinkis
                                         President and Chief Financial Officer


                                       24
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                       3,097,200
<SECURITIES>                                    48,600
<RECEIVABLES>                               26,790,600
<ALLOWANCES>                                10,148,000
<INVENTORY>                                    735,400
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            36,888,600
<PP&E>                                     158,056,100
<DEPRECIATION>                              58,748,200
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             176,228,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       35,416,600
<BONDS>                                     44,880,000
<COMMON>                                       133,400
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  81,904,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               176,228,800
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            83,315,100
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               61,279,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,565,400
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             3,332,600
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,731,200
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              8,014,100
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,112,900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          4,901,200
<DISCONTINUED>                               1,163,100
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,738,100
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.32
        

</TABLE>
|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company. |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  | June 14, 2010  |   | By:    | /s/ A. Dale Mayo                                                          |   |
|--------|---------------------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |                |   |   | A. Dale MayoPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer) |   |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENT.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                   12,517
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                           615,574
<ALLOWANCES>                            136,436
<INVENTORY>                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        279,320
<PP&E>                                  818,694
<DEPRECIATION>                          371,654
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        1,285,421
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   447,532
<BONDS>                                 548,676
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<COMMON>                                    243
<OTHER-SE>                              198,836
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          1,285,421
<SALES>                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        636,970
<CGS>                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           376,523 <F1>
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                         30,310 <F2>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        107,410
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       37,805
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          28,609
<INCOME-TAX>                                580
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      28,029
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                 (262)
<NET-INCOME>                             27,767
<EPS-BASIC>                                1.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                              1.02
<FN>
<F1>
THIS AMOUNT IS THE SUM OF THE FITNESS CENTER OPERATIONS LINE, THE
PRODUCTS AND SERVICES LINE, THE ADVERTISING LINE AND THE CHANGE IN DEFERRED
MEMBERSHIP ORIGINATION COSTS LINE ON THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000.
<F2>
THIS AMOUNT IS THE MEMBER PROCESSING AND COLLECTION CENTERS LINE ON THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
2000.
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### James Leonard CRAWFORD, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 17, 1974.

Anthony M. Wilhoit, William C. Ayer, Jr., Frankfort, for appellant.

Ed W. Hancock, George Geoghegan, III, Frankfort, for appellee.

Memorandum Opinion of the Court by

Justice JONES,

Affirming.*
---

Exhibit 32.1

U.S.GEOTHERMAL INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Daniel J. Kunz, certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to my knowledge:



| | 1. | The annual report of U.S. Geothermal Inc. on Form 10-K
      for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007 (report), which this
      certification accompanies, fully complies with the requirements of Section
      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 results of
      operations of the business issuer.                                                                                                         



|Date: June 26, 2007     | 
|----------------------- | 
|                        | 
|                        | 
|/s/ Daniel J.
    Kunz  | 
|Daniel J. Kunz          | 
|Chief Executive Officer | 

---
*

 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 99-20717

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

SAUL NIEVES MORALES,

 DefendantAppellant.

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

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-99-CR-137-1

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

August 31, 2000

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, STEWART and PARKER, Circuit Judges:

PER CURIAM:*

SaulNieves Morales appeals his conviction for aiding and abetting the possession with intent

to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine. Morales argues that (1) his seizure was illegal as it

was based on neither suspicion nor probable cause; (2) the district court should have suppressed all

evidence seized from the apartment where he was staying “because the government failed to sustain

its burden of demonstrating that the consent to search the residence wasfreelyand voluntarilygiven;”

and (3) the district court erred in refusing to reduce his offense level under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 for

minor participation.

The record reflects that there was a reasonable basis for Drug Enforcement Administration

officers to suspect that Morales was involved in criminal activity that had occurred or was about to
occur inside the residence and that his detention was not unlawful. See United States v. Sokolow,

490 U.S. 1, 7, (1989). The district court did not clearly err in finding that Morales freely and

voluntarily consented to the search of the apartment. See United States v. Morales, 171 F.3d 978,

981 (5th Cir. 1999). Nor did the district court clearly err in finding that minor-participant status was

not warranted under the circumstances of this case. See United States v. Brown, 54 F.3d 234, 241

(5th Cir. 1995)

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: Oct. 26Published Oct. 26, 2017
                        
                        By Airman 1st Class Jasmine Vanderheyden
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS)** – On this look around the Air Force, Airmen with the 354th Fighter Wing out of Eielson AFB, Alaska started Exercise Arctic Gold 18-1, and additional pilot positions are open to Air National Guard and Reserve Pilots. Hosted by Airman 1st Class Jasmine Vanderheyden.
For previous episodes, click here for the Air Force TV page.
Related links:
- Active-duty positions added for Guard, Reserve pilots
- Arctic Gold 18-1 showcases Icemen readinessAround the Air Force 



ATAF 



Featured Videos 



A1C Jasmine Vanderheyden 



354th 



Arctic Gold 



pilot shortage 



ANG 



Reserve 



Eielson AFB 



Personel
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350**

**As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Jacobs Entertainment, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Quarterly Report”),I, Stephen R. Roark, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       theAnnual Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.                                      theinformation contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/ Stephen R. Roark |                    |
|--------|----------------------|-------------------------|
|   | Name:                | Stephen R. Roark        |
|   | Title:               | Chief Financial Officer |
|   | Date:                | March 29, 2006          |
|        |                      |                         |  |

 

----
Order filed April 30, 2013

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 12

- 01031

- CV

____________ ARSENIO CANTU , Appellant

V. VERONICA PENA, Appellee

On Appeal from the Co unty Civil C our t at Law No

. 4

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1017967



### O R D E R
Appellant’ s brief was due April 22, 2013

. No brief or motion for extension
of time has been filed.
Unless appellant submits a brief to the clerk of this court on or before May 30, 2013 , the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 168 (Tuesday, August 31, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 53361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21857]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: [to be announced].

STATUS: Closed Meeting.

PLACE: 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC.

DATE AND TIME OF PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED MEETING: September 2, 2010 at 2 
p.m.

CHANGE IN THE MEETING: Additional Item.
    The following matter will also be considered during the 2 p.m. 
Closed Meeting scheduled for Thursday, September 2, 2010 at 2 p.m.:

Consideration of Amicus Participation

    Commissioner Walter, as duty officer, voted to consider the item 
listed for the Closed Meeting in closed session, and determined that no 
earlier notice thereof was possible.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, 
please contact the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: August 27, 2010.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-21857 Filed 8-27-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. TYRONE JOHNSON.

July 23, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Trump's Castle Hotel & Casino, Inc.,
Trump's Castle Funding, Inc., and Trump's Castle Associates, L.P. (the
"Companies") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Donald
J. Trump, Chief Executive Officer of the Companies, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

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

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




/s/ Donald J. Trump
-------------------
Donald J. Trump
Chief Executive Officer of
         Trump's Castle Hotel & Casino, Inc.
         Trump's Castle Funding, Inc.
         Trump's Castle Associates, L.P.

August 14, 2002

                                       1
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY, BY THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION v. WALTER ROGERS BUILDERS, INC.

May 7, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.