alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
News United States Air Force
 403rd Wing evacuates aircraft, continues to fly Hurricane Marco, Tropical Storm LauraPublished Aug. 24, 2020
                        
                        By Lt. Col. Marnee A.C. Losurdo
                        
                        
                        403rd Wing Public Affairs
                **KEESLER AIR FORCE BASE, Miss. (AFNS) --**
                The Air Force Reserve’s 403rd Wing relocated its 20 aircraft Aug. 23 as Hurricane Marco and Tropical Storm Laura continued their path toward the U.S. Gulf Coast.
The wing’s 815th Airlift Squadron, a tactical airlift unit, flew their C-130J Super Hercules to Joint Base San Antonio, Texas, and the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron, or Hurricane Hunters, relocated their WC-130Js and operations to Atlantic Aviation Charleston International Airport, South Carolina, where they will continue to fly both storms and provide weather information to the National Hurricane Center, which greatly improves their intensity and track forecasts.
Marco became a hurricane Aug. 23 and is forecasted to make landfall on the Louisiana coast Aug. 24, and Tropical Storm Laura could also become a hurricane and impact the Gulf Coast by Aug. 25, according to the National Hurricane Center.
“We are moving aircraft as a precautionary measure ahead of these storms for two reasons,” said Col. Jeffrey A. Van Dootingh, 403rd Wing vice commander. “First, to protect the aircraft from damage, and second, so we can continue to fly storm reconnaissance missions. It’s been an unprecedented year just keeping the mission going while mitigating the impacts of COVID. Now for the first time in history, we could have two hurricanes simultaneously in the Gulf of Mexico. Whatever Mother Nature and 2020 bring our way, we have been able to get the mission accomplished thanks to our outstanding Airmen who ensure we are always ready.”
Hurricane and storm surge warnings have been issued for portions of the Gulf Coast. A tropical storm warning is in effect for Keesler Air Force Base, Mississippi, and the surrounding area. The wing commander encourages all Airmen to review their hurricane preparedness strategy and take all appropriate storm response actions.
“If you have questions, please coordinate with your unit leadership and monitor official base and wing websites and social media channels,” he said.USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



AFRC 



403rd Wing 



815th Airlift Squadron 



Flying Jennies 



53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron 



Air Force Reserve Hurricane Hunters 



hurricane hunters 



Hurricane Marco 



Tropical Storm Laura 



Air Force Reserve 



National Hurricane Center 



Reserve Citizen Airmen 



NOAA Air Operations Center 



Air Force Reserve Command 



Hurricane Preparedness 



AFWN
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2488 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an exception to 

the exclusive use requirement for home offices if the other use involves 

care of a qualifying child of the taxpayer, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 18, 2014 

Mr. MCCONNELL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

an exception to the exclusive use requirement for home 

offices if the other use involves care of a qualifying 

child of the taxpayer, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Working Parents 

5 Home Office Act’’. 


rfrederick on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2488 IS

1 SEC. 2. EXCEPTION TO THE EXCLUSIVE USE REQUIREMENT 

2 FOR HOME OFFICES FOR CARE OF CHILDREN 

3 AND GRANDCHILDREN. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 280A(c) of the Internal 

5 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end 

6 the following: 

7 ‘‘(7) EXCEPTION TO EXCLUSIVITY REQUIRE8 MENT FOR BUSINESS USE OF A DWELLING UNIT.— 

9 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A taxpayer shall not 

10 be treated as failing to meet the exclusive use 

11 requirement of paragraph (1) with respect to a 

12 portion of a dwelling unit if the only other use 

13 of that portion is to care for a qualifying child 

14 of the taxpayer while the taxpayer is conducting 

15 the trade or business described in paragraph 

16 (1). 

17 ‘‘(B) QUALIFYING CHILD.—For purposes 

18 of this paragraph, the term ‘qualifying child’ 

19 has the meaning given to such term by section 

20 152(c)(1), except that only individuals bearing 

21 a relationship to the taxpayer described in sec22 tion 152(c)(2)(A) shall be taken into account 

23 under section 152(c)(1)(A).’’. 


rfrederick on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2488 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

3 December 31, 2013. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: New Air Force Chief of Staff Nomination, Highlights From 2020 Air Warfare SymposiumPublished March 6, 2020
                        
                        By Master Sgt. Robbie Arp
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                Today’s look Around the Air Force features the announcement of the Air Force’s new chief of staff nominee and highlights from the 2020 Air Warfare Symposium. (Hosted by Master Sgt. Robbie Arp)





For previous episodes, click **here** for the Air Force TV page.Featured Video 



AFTV 



ATAF 



Around the Air Force 



Air Force 



AF 



USAF 



CSAF 



chief of staff 



General Brown 



General Charles Brown 



2020 



2021 



Air Force Association 



AFA 



Air Warfare Symposium 



space force 



Spark Tank
#### BRUNO MANDOLINI v. J & M CARRIERS CORPORATION (T & T TRUCKING).

March 29, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
#### Hooser, et al. *v.*Ostien, Individually and as member, etc., Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, et al.

[No. 18,833.

Filed March 23, 1956.]

*340
      *George Rose,*of Indianapolis, for appellant.

*Edivard B. Henslee, John J. Naughton, Henslee, Monek & Murray*of Chicago, Illinois, and *Ralph Hamill*and *Robert Holloivell,*of Indianapolis, for appellees.

Royse, C. J.

Appellant brought this action against appellees for a temporary restraining order without notice, a temporary injunction on hearing, and on final hearing a permanent injunction. The trial court issued a temporary restraining order without notice. Subsequently each of the appellees filed their plea in abatement on the grounds the court did not have jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the action. Answers were filed by appellant. Trial was had on the issues formed. Evidence was introduced. The trial court entered judgment abating the action.

Appellant has attempted to appeal from that judgment. His assignments of error here are as follows:

> 1. “The court erred in sustaining the appellee’s pleas in abatement to the jurisdiction of the court to grant an interlocutory order.”

> *3412. “The court erred in denying the appellant’s petition for an interlocutory order in the form of a temporary injunction.”

> 3. “The judgment of the court is contrary to law.”

Appellees have filed their motion to dismiss this appeal on the ground the assignments of error present no question here.

It is a well-settled rule that where there has been a trial of the issues raised by a plea in abatement, questions arising thereon must be presented by motion for a new trial. *State ex rel. Rose*v. *Worden, Special Judge*(1939), 216 Ind. 83, 86, 23 N. E. 2d 264; *Eshelman*v. *State*(1930), 201 Ind. 475, 477, 169 N. E. 861; *Williams*v. *State*(1907), 169 Ind. 384, 386, 82 N. E. 790. The first assignment presents no question.

As heretofore indicated, the judgment herein abated the action. There was no judgment granting or denying a temporary injunction. Therefore, no question is presented by the second assignment.

The third purported assignment is not proper as an independent assignment of error. Flanagan, Wiltrout and Hamilton, Indiana Trial and Appellate Practice, Vol. 2, p. 156, §2386, Comment 2, and authorities there cited.

Therefore, the appeal must be dismissed.

Note. — Reported in 133 N. E. 2d 83.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 72 (Wednesday, May 3, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E944-E945]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                        BROADCAST OWNERSHIP BILL

                                 ______

                           HON. CLIFF STEARNS

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, May 3, 1995
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, today, I am proud to introduce a bipartisan 
bill to reduce the restrictions on ownership of broadcasting stations 
and other media of mass communication. Congressman Ralph Hall from 
Texas, along with a number of my esteemed Republican colleagues support 
this bill which repeals antiquated rules and regulations and brings 
broadcasting up to date with technology. The bill states that the FCC 
is not to prescribe or enforce any regulations concerning cross 
ownership. The only rules that the FCC can make address national caps 
and local ownership combinations. The video marketplace has undergone 
significant changes. Today, most Americans have access not only to many 

[[Page E945]] over-the-air broadcast channels, but also subscribe to 
cable, or own a home satellite receiver. With telephone company entry 
into the video marketplace, American consumers will have additional 
options from which to choose their programming. Despite all these 
advances in technology broadcasting should remain a vital component in 
the information age. Broadcast television occupies a unique position in 
the world of telecommunications. Broadcasting is not only the only 
technology available to 100 percent of American households, the content 
it provides is free. The only cost is for a receiver.
  The bill does the following: First, states that the FCC shall not 
prescribe or enforce rules limiting crossownership of mediums of mass 
communications; second, increases the aggregate national audience reach 
from 25 to 35 percent upon enactment. One year later allows the cap to 
increase to 50 percent. The bill contains a built-in safeguard; within 
2 years of enactment of the bill, the FCC is to commission a study to 
ensure competition in the marketplace; third, the bill allows certain 
station ownership combinations in a market: UHF/UHF; UHF/VHF and if the 
Commission determines that it will not harm competition and will not 
harm the preservation of a diversity of voices in the local market, 
VHF/VHF combinations; fourth, the bill also repeals all radio ownership 
restrictions.
  I might add that this bill will be presented as an amendment to the 
communications act of 1995, which has the full support of Chairman 
Bliley and Chairman Fields and as previously mentioned, it is 
bipartisan.

                          ____________________
```
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: SECAF Space Talk / The Air Force We NeedPublished March 8, 2019
                        
                        By Tech. Sgt. Robbie Arp
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                On this look Around the Air Force, Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson discusses the Air Force’s future in space and Air Force Chief of Staff General David Goldfein talks about the Air Force we need. Hosted by Tech. Sgt. Robbie Arp.

</iframe



For previous episodes, click **here** for the Air Force TV page.SecAF 



Secretary of the Air Force 



Air Force TV 



AFA 



Around the Air Force 



Heather Wilson 



AF Reports 



FeaturedVideos 



AirWarfare Symposium 



ATAF
### I N THE UNI TED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FI F TH CI RCUI T

No. 12-41407 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. FIDEL TORRES-TORRES, Defendant-Appellant

A ppeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:12-CR-156-1

Before JOLLY, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Fidel Torres-Torres has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders

v. C alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United S tates v . F lores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Torres-Torres has not filed a response. He has been released from prison and has no additional term of supervised release o r payment of a fine or special a ssessment. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflec t e d t h e rein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the U n i t e d S t a te s C o u r t o f A p p e al s

F i f t h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D October 25, 2013 Ly l e W . Cay ce Clerk

* Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R

. 47. 5, the court has d eterm ined that this op inion should not be p ublis hed and is not p reced ent excep t und er the lim ited circum s tances s et forth in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47. 5. 4. Case: 12-41407 Document: 00512420119 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/25/2013No. 12-41407

appeal p resents n o nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accor dingly, counsel’s motion for l e a v e to withdraw is GRANTED, c ounsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL I S DISMIS S E D in part as frivolous, see 5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2, and in p a r t as m oot, see United States v. Rosenbaum-Alanis , 483 F.3d 381, 382-83 (5th Cir. 2007).

2 Case: 12-41407 Document: 00512420119 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/25/2013
Exhibit 32.1



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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Plymouth Opportunity REIT, Inc. (the “Registrant”) for the year ended December 31,
2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Jeffrey
E. Witherell, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and Director of the Registrant, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge and belief:

| | 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 operations
of the Registrant.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 28, 2012





|/s/ | Jeffrey
E. Witherell                
|--- | ------------------------------------
|    | Jeffrey E. Witherell                
|,   | Chairman of the Board               
|    | Chief Executive Officer and Director
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2785 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2785

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to 
     publish a health advisory and submit reports with respect to 
                    microcystins in drinking water.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Safe and Secure Drinking Water 
Protection Act of 2014''.

SEC. 2. MICROCYSTINS IN DRINKING WATER.

    (a) Health Advisory.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental 
Protection Agency (referred to in this Act as the ``Administrator'') 
shall develop and publish a health advisory including recommendations 
on--
            (1)(A) the level of microcystins in drinking water below 
        which the water is expected to be safe for human consumption; 
        and
            (B) feasible treatment techniques and other means for 
        achieving that level; and
            (2) standardized procedures for testing for microcystins in 
        drinking water.
    (b) Reports.--Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 
of this Act, and each year thereafter, the Administrator shall submit 
to Congress a report that includes--
            (1) a description of the status of the efforts of the 
        Administrator to determine whether to regulate drinking water 
        with respect to the level of microcystins;
            (2) a description of the steps taken by the Administrator 
        to promote testing of drinking water for microcystins in areas 
        that have been affected by harmful algal blooms; and
            (3) an analysis of available treatment techniques and other 
        means for addressing microcystins in drinking water.

            Passed the Senate December 11, 2014.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
113th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 2785

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to 
     publish a health advisory and submit reports with respect to 
                    microcystins in drinking water.
```
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: 35th Space Symposium / OCP Uniform GuidancePublished April 29, 2019
                        
                        By Hosted by Senior Airman Jasmine Vanderheyden
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                On this look around the Air Force, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David L. Goldfein talks about the importance of maintaining space superiority at the 35th Space Symposium and new guidance was released on the operational camouflage uniform. Hosted by Senior Airman Jasmine Vanderheyden.

</iframe



For previous episodes, click here for the Air Force TV page.

Related links:
- Top Air Force Officer Speaks at 35th Space Symposium
- Air Force senior leaders update OCP uniform guidanceAirmen 



Airman 



Air Force 



Air Force TV 



stories 



military 



AFTV 



ATAF 



CSAF 



Air Force Chief of Staff 



uniforms 



Senior Leaders 



OCP 



camouflage 



space 



space superiority 



Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David L. Goldfien 



Gen. David L. Godlfien
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7419

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

EDDIE C. RASBERRY, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, Senior District

Judge. (CR-00-76, CA-00-76-2)

Submitted: November 8, 2001 Decided: November 19, 2001

Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eddie C. Rasberry, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert Joseph Seidel,

Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Eddie C. Rasberry, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. See United States v. Rasberry, Nos. CR-00-76;

CA-00-76-2 (E.D. Va. filed July 31, 2001; entered Aug. 1, 2001).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL

OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of Kevin M.
Sheehan, the President and Chief Executive Officer, and Wendy A. Beck, the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, of Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. (the Company), does hereby certify, that, to such officers
knowledge:

The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 (the Form
10-K), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Date: February 20, 2013





By:

/s/ Kevin M. SheehanName:

Kevin M. SheehanTitle:

President and Chief Executive Officer


By:

/s/ Wendy A. BeckName:

Wendy A. BeckTitle:

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6288

HENRY PERRY-BEY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus S. K. YOUNG, Warden, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Vi rginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-03-817-AM) Submitted: July 16, 2004 Decided: July 29, 2004 Before LUTTIG, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henry Perry-Bey, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Henry Perry-Bey seeks to appeal the district court’s orders dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies and denying his motion to alter or amend judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). The orders are not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a subst antial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Perry-Bey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED