alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
News United States Air Force
 AF captures 2016 Armed Forces Men’s Soccer goldPublished May 19, 2016
                        
                        By Steven Dinote
                        
                        
                        Armed Forces Sports
                **FORT BENNING, Ga. (AFNS) --**
                Air Force prevailed in their rematch against Navy 3-2 on May 13 to capture the 2016 Armed Forces Men’s Soccer Championship after a weeklong tournament at Fort Benning.  Navy Ensign Alex Wilson of Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida, struck first with a solid goal in the 12th minute, in what it would appear to be a repeat of the first match between the two squads on day two of the tournament. However, Air Force Airman 1st Class Christopher Grant of Ramstein Air Base, Germany, had other thoughts as he entered the box to score the penalty kick in the 17th minute. Air Force capitalized on their momentum with goals by 2nd Lt. Micah Cummins of Royal Air Force Mildenhall, England, and Airman 1st Class Benjamin Latimer of Pope Army Airfield, North Carolina, in the 45th and 66th minutes. Air Force’s defense held strong throughout the second half. In the final minute of the match, Petty Officer 2nd Class Kyle Baker of Prince George, Maryland, scored Navy’s final goal on a penalty kick.“This feels absolutely amazing,” said Air Force head coach Lt. Col. Derrick Weyand of Incirlik AB, Turkey.“We by far had the best team out here ... we just had to play at our level,” Weyand said. “These guys perfected the game plan and I couldn’t be more proud of them, because they executed the plan. The toughest team we faced was Navy. Their team and their coach are tactically sound and by far the Navy did an exceptional job.”Grant, who was the tournament’s leading scorer, said the highlight of the tournament was winning with his teammates.“They wanted revenge so bad because they lost to the Army last year. And to come here, arm the guns and win the gold is salvation,” he said.The U.S. Armed Forces Men’s Soccer team will conduct a trial/training camp in the December/January timeframe in order to prepare for the 2nd Conseil International du Sport Militaire (CISM) World Football Cup in Muscat, Oman, Jan. 13-29, 2017. The world-class event will feature 16 teams from around the world.Soccer 



sports 



Navy 



Championship 



Armed Forces Men’s Soccer Championship
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         156,555
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   37,690
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               195,692
<PP&E>                                         113,912
<DEPRECIATION>                                  35,457
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 494,718
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,398,107
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         5,362
<OTHER-SE>                                   (908,751)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   494,718
<SALES>                                        152,480
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               152,480
<CGS>                                           33,863
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   33,863
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,470,415
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              61,171
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,412,969)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,412,969)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,412,969)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
News United States Air Force
 Eielson AFB retains aggressor missionPublished April 14, 2015
                        
                        By Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS) --**
                Air Force officials announced April 14 that Eielson Air Force Base will retain the 18th Aggressor Squadron and its assigned 18 F-16 Fighting Falcon aggressor aircraft.  
The aggressors are currently based at Eielson AFB, Alaska, which the Air Force announced last year is the preferred alternative for 48 F-35A Lightning II aircraft. 
“Once the (Air Force) made the decision to bed down the F-35 at Eielson, we had to re-assess the viability of retaining the aggressor mission at the same location. Keeping them at Eielson proved to be the most operationally sound option, as well as the most cost effective,” said Mark A. Pohlmeier, the acting deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force for installations. “Maintaining the 18th AGRS at Eielson makes sense because the proximity of Eielson AFB to JPARC (Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex) is optimum to support both Red Flag–Alaska and Distant Frontier exercises.”
Pohlmeier went on to explain that moving the 18th AGRS to another location would actually cost more money over the long term.  
“Even if the Air Force moved the 18th AGRS to another location the adversary air requirement in the region remains, which would require the Air Force to send units to Alaska on temporary duty to support the requirement,” Pohlmeier said.  “The annual recurring cost for temporary duty support would exceed the one-time $123.1 million military construction cost (which would be required if the F-35s are based at Eielson AFB) in just three years.   
The Air Force has already begun the Environmental Impact Analysis Process to evaluate the impact of basing the F-35s at Eielson AFB while retaining the F-16 aggressor aircraft.   
The 18th AGRS stood up August 24, 2007. The 18th AGRS prepares Combat Air Force, joint and allied aircrews to meet the demanding requirements of air-to-air combat through challenging, realistic threat replication, training, test support, academics and feedback.18th Aggressor Squadron 



aggressor aircraft 



F-16 Fighting Falcon 



Eielson AFB Related Links
        F-16 Fighting Falcon
                                Sept. 23, 2015
                                The F-16 Fighting Falcon is a compact, multi-role fighter aircraft. It is highly maneuverable and has proven itself in air-to-air combat and air-to-surface attack. It provides a relatively low-cost, high-performance weapon system for the United States and allied nations.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

FRED VILLANOVA,

 Appellant,

v.

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION, AS RECEIVER FOR

HOME SAVINGS OF AMERICA,

 Appellee. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-11-00361-CV

Appeal from the

431st Judicial District Court

of Denton County, Texas 

(TC# 2010-50001-367)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in part 

of the judgment. We reverse the portion of the trial court’s judgment awarding damages and 

attorneys’ fees and granting summary judgment on Appellee’s counterclaims and inferential 

rebuttal defense of sole proximate cause. Because damages are unliquidated and Appellant has 

contested liability, we remand these causes on all issues—including liability—to the trial court 

for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. In all other respects, we affirm the trial 

court’s judgment.

We further order that Appellant and Appellee each pay one-half (1/2) the costs of this 

appeal. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7997

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JESUS FRANCISCO ROMERO-GONZALEZ, a/k/a Jose E.

Romero, a/k/a Jesus Gonazales, a/k/a Juan

Pablo Martinez,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District

Judge. (CR-99-244-A, CA-01-844-AM)

Submitted: February 14, 2002 Decided: February 27, 2002

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jesus Francisco Romero-Gonzalez, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Jesus Francisco Romero-Gonzalez 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. United States v. Romero-Gonzalez,

Nos. CR-99-244-A; CA-01-844-AM (E.D. Va. Oct. 29, 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY REFERENCES TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           9,403
<SECURITIES>                                     2,947
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,818
<ALLOWANCES>                                       602
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,897
<PP&E>                                          12,209
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,609
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  41,087
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,669
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            75
<OTHER-SE>                                      33,084
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    41,087
<SALES>                                          8,871
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,350
<CGS>                                              570
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,258
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,315
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  25
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,867
<INCOME-TAX>                                       738
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,129
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-16-00426-CV

La Joya Independent School District

v.

Tanya Gonzalez, Individually and A/N/F of Josue Rogelio Uranga, Deceased Minor

On appeal from the

430th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Cause No. C-4063-12-J

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

November 2, 2017
422 A.2d 1175

#### Commonwealth v. Williams, Appellant.

Submitted March 20, 1979.

Ronald Schulman, for appellant; Vail Williams, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before VAN der VOORT, HESTER and WIEAND, JJ.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
News United States Air Force
 March issue of Airman magazine now availablePublished March 4, 2015
                        
                        By Airman Magazine Staff
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                The March 2015 issue of Airman magazine is now available for download on your tablet by clicking: Appleor Android. To view the magazine on your web browser, click here.In this issue or Airman, our cover story tells the story of Master Sgt. Randy Rollins and his journey as a child who tinkers on Volkswagen Beetles with his uncle, to an Airman who tinkers on the C-5 Galaxy.Our second story highlights the 50th anniversary of Operation Rolling Thunder. Airman associate editor, Randy Roughton, takes the reader through the journey of this operation through the eyes of F-105 Thunderchief pilots.The final feature in the magazine tells the story of Airman 1st Class Kaitlyn Evans and her best friend -- her horse Kobalt. Shortly after arriving to her first duty station at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, Kobalt joined her and continues to help her ride through any hard times.magazine 



March 



feature stories 



Airman magazine 



Airman
#### P. Ochoa and Wife v. Josefa M. Garza.

(No. 861, Op. Book No. 2, p. 123.)

Appeal from Bexar County.

February 23, 1881.

Opinion by

Walker, R. S., P. J.

§ 939. *Forcible entry and detainer; complaint; description of premises.*In an action of forcible entry and detainer the complaint stated that the defendant “did make a forcible entry into and upon certain lands belonging to the complainant, to wit, a *portion*of the league' and labor patented to Jose Antonio de la Garza, assignee of Juan Manuel Uriga, on the 23d day of February, 1848, by patent No. 364, vol. J, near the bank of the Aroya de la Minita, in precinct No. 6, of Bexar county, and that the said defendants had no right of possession whatever to any portion of the land herein described,” etc. *Held,*1. That the complaint was insufficient, (1) because it did not sufficiently describe the land in question, and (2) because it did not allege that the plaintiff was in possession of the land at the time of the alleged forcible entry. 2. That this insufficiency of description was a-fundamental error, and not amendable, and therefore the judgment of the court below, which was for the plaintiff, was reversed, and the cause dismissed. [Cooper v. Marchbanks, 22 Tex. 4.]

Eeversed and dismissed.
United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 26, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-41248

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE LUIS ORTIZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:03-CR-624-2 

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

Before JONES, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*































































































































































Larry Chris Iles, appointed to represent Jose Luis Ortiz, has

filed a motion to withdraw and brief pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967). Ortiz has not filed a

response. Our independent review of the brief and the record

discloses no nonfrivolous issue in this direct appeal.

Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel

is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS

DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
583 A.2d 316

#### THOMAS MIZERAK v. COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, ETC.

February 6, 1990.

Petition for certification denied. (See 230 *N.J.Super.*577, 554 A.2d 476)
#### Robert E. Letherby v. Alvin Shaver.

*Justices of the peace*— Service *of summons*— Party *attending courtr*

Service of summons from justice’s court, made upon a party to a suit while attending as a witness upon the trial in a county other than that in which he resides, is irregular, and a judgment rendered therein, in the absence of a voluntary appearance by the defendant, will be set aside on *certiorari*in the Supreme Court. *Mitchell v. Circuit Judge,*53 Mich. 541.

*Certiorari*to a justice of the peace.

Argued January 23, 1889.

Judgment reversed and case dismissed

January 25, 1889.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

*Auten <& Moss,*for defendant, and petitioner in *certiorari.*

Sherwood, C. J.

The petitioner is a resident of St, Johns, in the county of Clinton. He had a suit pending in the circuit court for the county of Montcalm, in which he was plaintiff, and said suit was tried on September 11, 1888. It appears from the record that Shaver was obliged to go to Stanton, the county seat, on September 10, to attend said court for the trial of his suit, as a. party and witness therein, and for no other purpose, and that he was detained at the court on said business until September 12, and no other; that said cause was tried on September 11 as aforesaid; that on said day, while he' was in attendance upon the court, the summons in this-cause was issued by a justice of the peace, and that no other summons or other process ivas served upon him.

It further appears that at the time the summons was returnable the defendant appeared specially and by his attorney, and moved the court to set aside the ser*501vice and dismiss the case, for the reason that the defendant was a non-resident of the county of Montcalm, and was at the time the summons was served upon him .attending the trial of the cause in the circuit as a party and witness therein, and he filed an affidavit setting forth the foregoing facts, which the record shows were undisputed.

The justice, after taking time to consider of the matter, ■overruled the motion; and, the defendant not thereafter appearing, the justice proceeded with the case, and rendered judgment for the plaintiff. The justice held the affidavit insufficient upon which to base the relief sought by the defendant.

The justice erred in his ruling. The motion of the ■defendant to set aside the service and dismiss the suit should have been granted. See *Mitchell v. Circuit Judge,*53 Mich. 541 (19 N. W. Rep. 176), and cases therein cited.

And the judgment he rendered must now be reversed, and the case dismissed, with costs.

Morse, Campbell, and -Long, JJ., concurred. Champlin, J., did not sit.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1027 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1027

  To amend title 36, United States Code, to authorize the spouse and 
 siblings of a recipient of the Purple Heart medal to become associate 
members in the Military Order of the Purple Heart of the United States 
                       of America, Incorporated.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2007

  Mr. Murtha introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 36, United States Code, to authorize the spouse and 
 siblings of a recipient of the Purple Heart medal to become associate 
members in the Military Order of the Purple Heart of the United States 
                       of America, Incorporated.

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

SECTION 1. PERSONS ELIGIBLE FOR ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP IN THE MILITARY 
              ORDER OF THE PURPLE HEART.

    Section 140503(b) of title 36, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``parents and'' and inserting ``the parents, spouse, siblings, 
and''.
                                 <all>
```
1997 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

3-13-1997

Green v. Phila Housing Auth

Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 95-1908

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1997

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1997 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Green v. Phila Housing Auth" (1997). 1997 Decisions. Paper 61.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1997/61
1

 FOR PUBLICATION

 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

 ___________ 

 No. 95-1908 

 ___________ 

 DONALD GREEN, 

 Appellant 

v. 

 PHILADELPHIA HOUSING AUTHORITY; 

 WILLIAM BERGMAN, INTERIM CHIEF OF POLICE; 

 DANIEL ROSENSTEIN, CAPTAIN; JOHN CRESCI, DEPUTY CHIEF, 

 IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL AND OFFICIAL CAPACITIES 

 AS OFFICIALS OF THE PHILADELPHIA HOUSING AUTHORITY 

 _______________________________________________ 

 On Appeal from the United States District Court 

 for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania 

 (D.C. Civil Action No. 94-cv-02885) 

 ___________________ 

 Argued June 12, 1996 

 Before: SCIRICA and ROTH, Circuit Judges

 and RESTANI, Judge, Court of International Trade* 

 __________________ 

 ORDER AMENDING SLIP OPINION 

 __________________ 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the slip opinion in the above 

case, filed January 31, 1997, be amended as follows: 

 

*The Honorable Jane A. Restani, Judge, United States Court of 

International Trade, sitting by designation. 
2

 1. Page 13, line 8: Delete the last sentence of the 

paragraph and substitute in its place, "Therefore under the facts 

of this case any pretext is irrelevant." 

 2. By signaling footnote 9 at the end of the first 

full paragraph on page 13, line 9 (after the word "irrelevant."), 

and inserting the following footnote: 

9. A pretextual argument is appropriate when there is a question 

whether an employee was penalized because of the 

challenged speech or for some other reason, or 

when there is a question whether the employer held 

an "erroneous and unreasonable belief about what 

plaintiff said." Waters, 114 S. Ct. at 1889. The 

Supreme Court remanded in Waters because there was 

a "question whether Churchill was actually fired 

because of those statements, or because of 

something else." Id. But this is not at issue 

here. It is undisputed that Green was transferred 

because of his "statements," not for some other 

reason. Nor is there a dispute the Philadelphia 

Housing Authority Police Department reasonably 

believed that Green appeared at the bail hearing. 

 3. Renumber all subsequent footnotes. 

 BY THE COURT, 

 /s/ Anthony J. Scirica 

 

 Circuit Judge 

DATED: March 13, 1997