alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
News United States Air Force
 2015 climate survey results consistent with past years’ findingsPublished Nov. 2, 2016
                        
                        By Kat Bailey
                        
                        
                        Air Force Personnel Center Public Affairs
                **JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas (AFNS) --**
                Results for the Air Force’s Total Force Climate Survey conducted March 13 - April 27, 2015, show that more than 80 percent of Airmen completing the survey are satisfied, in general.
The survey was an opportunity for active-duty, Air Force Reserve, Air National Guard and civilian Airmen to give senior Air Force leaders an honest view of the culture and climate that operates in the Air Force on a daily basis. More than 132,000 respondents communicated their concerns during the 2015 survey compared to 163,000 total force Airmen in 2012, the last time the Air Force conducted the climate survey.
Overall, around 23 percent of the total force responded to the survey with the majority of responses coming from active-duty and civilian Airmen, followed by Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard.
The survey focused on eight core factors including Air Force senior leadership support, unit senior leader support, immediate supervisor support, satisfaction, resources, recognition, unit performance and unit alliance.
The core factors retained many of the same questions from the 2012 survey; however, some questions were updated and refined to capture more actionable data. In addition, all responses to every question were included in the data used to calculate results, including the “not applicable” and “don’t know” responses.
Survey results from the 2015 Total Force Climate Survey, as well as the 2008, 2010 and 2012 results, are available on the Air Force Portal. Click the Air Force Survey Office quick link on the right side under the Air Force Information heading and once at the survey office page, mouse over the Total Force Climate Survey link on the left side and select the 2015 survey.
For more information about Air Force personnel programs, go to the myPerswebsite. Individuals who do not have a myPers account can request one by following these instructions.AFPC 



survey
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">580 Park Avenue, Incorporated, Petitioner-Landlord- <br><br>against<br><br>Joseph R. Mirto, Respondent-Tenant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Tenant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), dated January 11, 2018, which denied his motion to vacate a warrant of eviction in a nonpayment summary proceeding.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Order (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), dated January 11, 2018, affirmed, with $10 costs.</p><p>The parties' stipulation of settlement is clear, and literal enforcement of its terms is not unjust under the circumstances (<i>see Taboola, Inc. v Newsweek Media Group, Inc.</i>, 171 AD3d 510 [2019]; <i>Mill Rock Plaza Assoc. v Lively</i>, 224 AD2d 301 [1996]). The commercial tenant clearly violated the stipulation's provisions by failing to make two scheduled payments in a timely manner and then by failing to cure the first payment default in the agreed-upon five-day period (<i>see Cadlerock Joint Venture, L.P. v Rubenstein</i>, 26 AD3d 219, 220 [2006]). Moreover, literal enforcement of the terms of the stipulation of settlement is not unjust in this case, where the agreement was negotiated by sophisticated parties, all of whom were represented by counsel, and the default was neither inadvertent nor trivial (<i>see McKenzie v Vintage Hallmark, </i>302 AD2d 503 [2003]; <i>see also 1029 Sixth v Riniv Corp.</i>, 9 AD3d 142 [2004], <i>appeal dismissed </i>4 NY3d 795 [2005]).</p><p>We have considered tenant's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. </p><br>I concur I concur I concur<br>Decision Date: June 26, 2019<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
News United States Air Force
 Air Force selects 16 weather squadron commander candidatesPublished Sept. 11, 2014
                        
                        By Debbie Gildea
                        
                        
                        Air Force Personnel Center Public Affairs
                **JOINT BASE SAN ANTONIO-RANDOLPH, Texas (AFNS) --**
                The 15W Weather Officer Squadron Commander Candidate Selection Board held here July 23-24 selected 16 weather officers as candidates for nine projected calendar year 2015 weather squadron command vacancies, Air Force Personnel Center officials announced Sept. 10.
Command selections are expected to be announced in mid-November, according to AFPC weather assignment officer Maj. Jimmy Odom.
"Candidates who are not matched to a squadron command remain eligible throughout the calendar year for other squadron command opportunities, such as 365-day extended deployment squadron command, Air Education and Training Command recruiting and training squadron command and Reserve Officer Training Corps detachment command," Odom said.
The command candidate process is very competitive, the major said.
"The selection panel carefully reviewed every eligible officer's records and duty history and considered demonstrated leadership ability and professional development to ensure the most qualified candidates are available for command," he explained.
Weather squadron command candidates include Lieutenant Colonels Deborah Danyluk, Jack Evans, Hugh Freestrom, Barry Hunte, Jason King and Jody Zolman; Lieutenant Colonel-selects Barbara Costa, Joseph Coughlin, Bradley Harbaugh, Troy Kirk, Breea Lisko, Earl Nast, Steven Randle, Cedrick Stubblefield and Jason Wild; and Maj. Andrew M. Frey Jr.
For more information about weather command and other opportunities, go to the myPers website. Enter article number 13749 in the search window and select the 15XX weather link.weather 



personnel 



AFPC 



weather squadron
N O T F O RP U B L IC A T IO NIN W E S T ' S H AWA I # I RE P O R T S A N D P A C IF IC RE P O R T E R



### NO. CAAP-20-0000591

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS O F THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

STATE OF HAWAI # I, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, EmployerAppellant/Appellant, v. GORDON K. LESLIE, Petitioner-Appellee/Appellee and STATE OF HAWAI # I, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS,

Agency-Appellee/Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT

( CIVIL NO. 1CCV-20-0000047)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL (By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, Hiraoka and Nakasone, JJ.) Upon consideration of the Motion to Withdraw Appeal,Pursuant to HRAP 42(b), filed March 18, 2021, by EmployerAppellant/Appellant State of Hawai # i , Department of Public Safety, the papers in support, record, and noting no opposition,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, April 15, 2021. /s/ Katherine G. Leonard Presiding Judge /s/ Keith K. Hiraoka Associate Judge /s/ Karen T. Nakasone Associate Judge

Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-20-0000591 15-APR-2021 09:22 AM Dkt. 50 OGMD
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1235 

To amend section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 to ensure 

that operating and capital assistance is provided for certain previously 

assisted public housing dwelling units. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 28, 2007 

Ms. VELA ́ZQUEZ (for herself, Mr. CROWLEY, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. SERRANO, Mr. 

WEINER, Mr. NADLER, Mrs. MALONEY of New York, Mr. MEEKS of New 

York, and Mr. RANGEL) introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 

1937 to ensure that operating and capital assistance 

is provided for certain previously assisted public housing 

dwelling units. 

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 ‘‘Public Housing Equal 

5 Treatment Act of 2007’’. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HR 1235 IH

1 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN PREVIOUSLY ASSISTED 

2 PUBLIC HOUSING. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 9 of the United States 

4 Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437g) is amended by 

5 adding at the end the following new subsection: 

6 ‘‘(o) ENSURING CORRECT ASSISTANCE.— 

7 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other 

8 provision of law, in determining the allocations for 

9 each public housing agency from the Operating and 

10 Capital Funds pursuant to this section, the Sec11 retary shall include as dwelling units eligible for 

12 such assistance all public housing dwelling units 

13 that— 

14 ‘‘(A) are owned by the public housing 

15 agency at the time of such determination; and 

16 ‘‘(B) before the date of the enactment of 

17 the Public Housing Equal Treatment Act of 

18 2007 have received development, operating, cap19 ital, or modernization assistance pursuant to 

20 the terms of any agreement with Department of 

21 Housing and Urban Development authorizing 

22 the agency to expend such funds on behalf of 

23 such units.’’. 

24 (b) APPLICABILITY.—The amendment made by sub25 section (a) shall apply with respect to assistance under 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

3 

•HR 1235 IH

1 section 9 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 for 

2 fiscal year 2008 and each fiscal year thereafter. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Darlene C. Amrhein, Appellant

No. 06-12-00107-CV v.

La Madeleine, Inc., Appellee

Appeal from the County Court at Law No 5 

of Dallas County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. CC96-10227-E). Opinion delivered by Justice 

Carter, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice 

Moseley participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Darlene C. Amrhein, has adequately indicated her inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED MARCH 6, 2013

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
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 accompanying annual report of Sanchez Energy Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Antonio R. Sanchez, III, President and Chief 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 to my knowledge:  (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 Company.  /s/ Antonio R. Sanchez, IIIAntonio   R. Sanchez, IIIChairman   of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal   Executive Officer)Date: March 30, 2012
News United States Air Force
 DOD begins workplace, gender relations survey for active-duty membersPublished Aug. 1, 2016
                        
                        By Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs Command Information
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS) --**
                About 735,000 active-duty members across the services will be invited to take part in the largest Department of Defense Workplace and Gender Relations Survey to date beginning July 25. 
The 2016 WGRA is part of a series of studies that will help assess any experiences members may have had recently with sexual harassment, sexual assault and any retaliatory behaviors associated with reporting these incidents. 
"This survey is critical to our ability to understand these unwanted behaviors in the Air Force,” said Aileen Richards, an Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response operations research analyst. “The survey also includes experiences outside the workplace in order to understand the full scope of the issue and how best to support Airmen.”
This is the only survey the DOD uses to measure rates of sexual assault and harassment for active-duty members, which is why participants’ survey responses will be confidential to the fullest extent permitted by law.
Active-duty members who are selected will be contacted by the Defense Manpower Data Center’s contractor via postal mail and email. Interested Airmen can check DMDC’s survey website to see if they have been selected for the survey.  The survey is voluntary, and respondents can use duty time to complete the survey.
The survey will help commanders at all levels evaluate current military workplace relations, professionalism and personal safety, and have important implications for how the military operates in the future, to include military training, justice and services.
“If you’re selected for this survey, we strongly encourage you to participate and make your voice heard,” said Maj. Gen. James Johnson, the Air Force SAPR director. “It’s important for us to base our training and policies on solid scientific research, which includes understanding current conditions across the force. As we improve our understanding of the problem, our future response and preventions efforts will also improve, and we need your help and participation to improve both.”
The survey will run until Sept. 28, and results of the survey are scheduled to be released on the DMDC website in spring 2017.Gender 



DOD 



FM 



survey 



WGRA
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 123 Reference Change House (RCH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 123

To authorize appropriations for the San Gabriel Basin Restoration Fund.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2007

 Mr. Dreier (for himself, Ms. Solis, Mr. Gary G. Miller of California, 
 Mr. Schiff, and Mrs. Napolitano) introduced the following bill; which 
   was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

                             June 25, 2007

     The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure discharged

                             June 25, 2007

            Rereferred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize appropriations for the San Gabriel Basin Restoration Fund.

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

SECTION 1. SAN GABRIEL BASIN RESTORATION FUND.

    Section 110(d)(1) of division B of the Miscellaneous Appropriations 
Act, 2001 (114 Stat. 2763A-223), as enacted into law by section 1(a)(4) 
of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-554), is 
amended by striking ``$85,000,000'' and inserting ``$135,000,000''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Allen et al. *v.*Review Board of The Indiana Employment Security Division et al.

[No. 19,152.

Filed December 14, 1959.]

*Lynnville G. Miles,*of Indianapolis, for appellants.

*Edwin K. Steers,*Attorney General, *Keith Campbell*and *Robert W. McNevin,*Deputy Attorneys General, for appellee Review Board.

*Stephen W. Terry*and *Baker & Daniels,*of Indianapolis, for appellee, Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co.

Bierly, P. J.

This is an appeal from a decision and judgment of the Review Board of the Indiana *166Employment Security Division affirming the determination of its claims’ deputy.

From the decision and judgment of said Review Board appellants perfected this appeal. The assignment of errors reads as follows:

> ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS

> “The appellants say that there is manifest error in the decision, judgment, findings, decree and the proceedings of the Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division in this, to-wit:

> “(1) That the decision of the Review Board is contrary to law.

> “WHEREFORE, the appellants pray that the decision of the Review Board be reversed and that the Review Board be ordered to correct its said decision and for such other relief as the appellants may be entitled to.”

Said assignment of errors wholly fails to name any parties, either appellant or appellee. This, of course, is fatal to this attempted appeal. It is provided by Rule 2-6 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, which is binding on this Court as well as the litigants, that the title of the assignment of errors shall name all parties seeking relief by appeal as appellants and shall name as appellees all parties to the judgment whose interests are adverse to the appellants. Appellants have entirely failed to comply with the provisions of said rule.

We do not have a failure to “properly” name the parties appellant and appellee. Here there is a total omission to name any parties anywhere in the assignment of errors. There is, therefore, no assignment of errors before this Court and, consequently, no assigned error is presented to this Court for determination.

*167It follows that this attempted appeal must be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

Gonas, Kelley, JJ., concurring. ■

Smith, J., not participating.

Note. — Reported in 162 N. E. 2d 689.
News United States Air Force
 Doolittle Raider raises toast 74 years after historic missionPublished April 20, 2016
                        
                        By Senior Airman Sam Fogleman
                        
                        
                        92nd Air Refueling Wing Public Affairs
                **FAIRCHILD AIR FORCE BASE, Wash. (AFNS)  --**
                One of two surviving Doolittle Raiders visited Fairchild Air Force Base for a commemorative toast April 18 in honor of the 74th anniversary of the Doolittle Raid on Tokyo.Former Staff Sgt. David Thatcher, who served in the Army Air Forces as a member of Flight Crew No. 7, was part of the air raid led by then-Lt. Col. Jimmy Doolittle. It marked the United States' first strike on the Japanese islands in World War II."The Doolittle Raid showed what we can accomplish when we work together to achieve a common goal," Thatcher said, now in his mid-90s. "I hope that Airmen will continue to honor the raid and remember what was done."In the years leading up to the raid, Japan had annexed Korea, invaded China and other parts of mainland Asia, and ultimately bombed Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, on Dec. 7, 1941. The Allies were desperate to send the Japanese Empire a message that it was not invincible. Though the damage inflicted on Japanese targets in the strike was seemingly insignificant, the Doolittle Raid emphasized the war was not over. America's Pacific fleet was still reeling from damage incurred at the war's opening but the sea-to-air attack, launched from the deck of the USS Hornet just a few hundred miles from Japan's coast, showed America was a force to be reckoned with.The Hennessy toast, part of an annual tradition of the Doolittle Raiders, symbolizes Doolittle receiving a vintage 1896 bottle of cognac on his 60th birthday in 1956. The bottle was opened at the final 2013 group celebration, where three of the 80 Raiders were in attendance. In times of commemoration since, the Hennessy toast celebrates the raid and its accomplishments."What an incredible opportunity for the Airmen of Team Fairchild to hear firsthand the story of 80 great Americans who launched an incredibly daring and dangerous mission despite knowing that they might not make it," said Jim O'Connell, the 92nd Air Refueling Wing historian. "Sergeant Thatcher and his fellow Doolittle Raiders, who were 'just doing their job,' through their actions, established another milestone in a legacy of excellence, and created, forever, an indelible mark in the history of the United States."The legacy of Thatcher and his comrades lives on in the minds of today's Airmen."It's not every day you have a Doolittle Raider on stage with you," said Col. Brian McDaniel, the 92nd ARW commander. "We all remember the photographs in our history books of the planes taking off from the Hornet. What an honor to have a legend here with us today."Doolittle Raid 



WWII 



Fairchild AFB 



commemoration 



anniversary 



heritage Related Links
        Randolph remembers Doolittle Raid’s impact on WWII
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SUPERGEN,
INC. SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      19,950,684
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  222,681
<ALLOWANCES>                                    10,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,461,456
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            22,995,145
<PP&E>                                       2,764,654
<DEPRECIATION>                                 266,591
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              27,564,675
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,434,141
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    59,907,412
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                27,564,675
<SALES>                                      1,282,455
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,282,455
<CGS>                                        1,221,388
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            12,013,176
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (11,457,165)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (11,457,165)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (11,457,165)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.66)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>