alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
News United States Air Force
 World War II Airman's remains identifiedPublished Aug. 7, 2015
                        
                        
                        DoD News, Defense Media Activity
                **WASHINGTON (AFNS) --**
                The remains of an Airman missing since World War II, have been identified and are being returned to his family for burial with full military honors, said the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency in a Defense Department news release issued Aug. 6.Army Air Forces 2nd Lt. Stephen V. Biezis of Chicago will be buried Aug. 14 in Arlington National Cemetery, Virginia, according to the release. His copilot, 1st Lt. James F. Gatlin of Jacksonville, Florida, was buried Jan. 30 in Bushnell, Florida.On Dec. 23, 1944, Biezis and his crew of five were assigned to the 575th Bombardment Squadron and were deployed to Germany. Biezis was the copilot of a B-26C Marauder that crashed after being struck by enemy fire while on a bombing mission against enemy forces near Ahrweiler, Germany. Biezis, Gatlin and three other crew members were reported killed in action. His remains were not recovered during the war.One of the crew members parachuted from the aircraft but was captured and held as a prisoner of war by German forces, the release stated. Following his release, he reported to U.S. officials that he had no knowledge of the fate of the remaining crewmen.Following the war, the American Graves Registration Command conducted investigations on the loss of Biezis and his crew and successfully located the crash site, near Manderscheid and Bettenfeld. The remains of two crewmen were recovered.According to the release, on May 27, 1999, a U.S. team investigating World War II losses in Germany visited a crash site near Bettenfeld. Two German nationals had researched the crash site and showed the team artifacts that were found and turned over remains collected from the site. The remains were identified as Army Air Forces Staff Sgt. Joe R. Sanchez, 20, of Los Nietos, California. He was accounted for in March 2011, and returned to his family for burial with full military honors.Between 2011 and 2014, DOD teams have traveled to Bettenfeld and conducted operations at the crash site, the release stated.To identify Biezis’ remains, scientists from DPAA and the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory used forensic identification tools to include mitochondrial DNA, which matched his sister and cousin, according to the release.Of the 16 million Americans who served in World War II, more than 400,000 died. Today, more than 73,000 are unaccounted for from the conflict, the release stated.MIA 



WWII 



World War II 



Germany 



Arlington 



POW
#### John T. Gilbert v. W. F. Knight.

(No. 5450.)

Appeal from Brown County.

Scott & Jenkins, counsel for appellant.

No counsel appeared for appellee.

Opinion by

Willson, J.

§ 315. *Atoard of arbitrators held valid; case stated.*This is a proceeding under the statute of arbitration and awards. The agreement to arbitrate was signed by appellant for himself and for the firm of Knight & Gilbert, of which appellant was a member, as defendants, and by appellee as plaintiff. It provides for a settlement of all matter’s in dispute or controversy between the parties *384thereto. It was filed with the clerk of the county court, and the arbitrators therein named, as also an umpire, were duly sworn by said clerk. Having arbitrated the matters submitted by said agreement, an award in writing was made and signed by one of the arbitrators and the umpire, and returned to and filed with said clerk. Said award was in favor of appellant against appellee for $350. Appellee filed numerous objections to said award .being made the judgment of the court. One of said objections is, “because the agreement to arbitrate purports to have been between W. F. Knight as plaintiff and Gilbert & Knight as defendants, and of and concerning the accounts of said W. F. Knight, including his charge for services with said Gilbert & Knight, when the award now here filed is in favor of John T. Gilbert alone and directs W. F. Knight to pay said Gilbert $350. W. F. Knight alleges that he never agreed to any such arbitration, and that the award does not respond to the agreement and is not responsive to the issue herein set forth.” This exception was sustained by the court and the court refused to make the award its judgment. *Held*error. It is apparent from the record that there is no substantial departure,from the agreement in the award. The matters of dispute and controversy mentioned in said agreement were the identical matters considered and determined by the arbitrators and settled by the award. It is shown by the record that, in all respects, the arbitration was conducted in accordance with the statute; and further, that the parties to the agreement were present during said arbitration, introduced their evidence, etc. That the award is in favor of appellant individually and alone is no valid objection to it, when urged by appellee.

§ 316. *Award may be set aside, when.*If, as alleged in one of appellee’s objections, there was gross mistake committed by the arbitrators, this would be a valid defense against the award. [W. & W. Con. Rep. § 221.] Awards are regarded with peculiar favor by the law, and will not be set aside for trivial reasons. In the absence of fraud, *385mistake or misconduct, the award will be held final and conclusive as to all matters which were embraced in the arbitration agreement. [2 W. Con. Rep. § 349.]

June 22, 1887.

Reversed and remanded.
583 A.2d 348

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. RODNEY GAY.

March 26, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 32.1

Written Statement

Pursuant To

18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned, Steven G. Murdock, the Chief Executive Officer of Meade Instruments Corp. (the Company), pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, hereby certifies that:

(i) the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended February 28, 2011, as amended by Amendment No. 1, (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date: March 5, 2012



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /s/ STEVEN G. MURDOCK  
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION 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

I,
James S.J. Manuso, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
SuperGen, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of
SuperGen, Inc.

| |  | By:    |  | /s/JAMES S.J. MANUSO                                               
| |  | ------ |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | Name:  |  | James S.J. Manuso                                                  
| |  | Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)

I,
Michael Molkentin, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
SuperGen, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2004 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of SuperGen, Inc.

| |  | By:    |  | /s/MICHAEL MOLKENTIN                                                
| |  | ------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | Name:  |  | Michael Molkentin                                                   
| |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

---



QuickLinks
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1




                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-28985, Form S-8 No. 333-57269 and Form S-8 No. 333-77557)
pertaining to the 1996 Stock Incentive Plan, the LHS Group Inc. 1998 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan, the LHS Group Inc. Amended and Restated Stock Incentive
Plan, and the Priority Call Management, Inc. Amended and Restated 1993 Stock
Option Plan all of LHS Group Inc. of our report dated February 17, 2000, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements of LHS Group Inc. included in
this Annual Report (Form 10-K/A), for the year ended December 31, 1999.


                                                      /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Atlanta, Georgia
June 19, 2000
News United States Air Force
 Airmen, Sailors build Navy mines for B-1 deploymentPublished June 11, 2014
                        
                        By Senior Airman Yash Rojas
                        
                        
                        28th Bomb Wing Public Affairs
                **ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, S.D. (AFNS) --**
                Ellsworth Airmen partnered with several U.S. Navy minemen June 2 through 7 during a joint training mission to exercise the B-1B Lancer's capabilities in deploying Navy mines.
The 28th Munitions Squadron members teamed up with Sailors from the Naval Munitions Command Seal Beach for the first time to assist in building, loading and deploying Mk-62 and Mk-65 Quick Strike mines. 
"It was definitely a good experience," said Staff Sgt. Raymond Elmendorf, 28th MUNS conventional maintenance crew chief and munitions inspector. "I had never worked with the Navy before ... but it was good to build that camaraderie. When we were out there building [mines], it wasn't really just Air Force [and] Navy ... [it was much more] of a team."
The minemen primarily focused on the building of Mk-62s and Mk-65s, while the Airmen from Ellsworth concentrated more on loading the mines into the aircraft. 
"Working with the Air Force wasn't all that different for us, especially since we do this all the time," said U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Jeremy Frick. "We worked really well with the Airmen who took part in this build. They made it easy for us to build, load and wait for deployment of our mines."
While the Air Force does not routinely build Navy munitions, Ellsworth demonstrated it possesses the capabilities and the personnel to deploy Navy mines.
"If we had the technical guidance, we could definitely build it too," said Elmendorf. 
The experience was beneficial to all Airmen involved, said Elmendorf, who added this kind of training had not been performed for several years. Unique training opportunities give everyone a chance to build upon skills and become familiar with different munitions. 
The multi-mission B-1B is the backbone of America's long-range bomber force, carrying the largest payload of both guided and unguided weapons in the Air Force inventory, including Naval mines. It can rapidly deliver massive quantities of precision and non-precision weapons against any adversary, anywhere in the world, at any time.
"If we are called upon to work alongside Airmen to, we'll be ready," said Frink. "You don't want to have to be in a situation where you have to deploy mines, but if the threat is there, you want to know you and everyone you are working with knows what they're doing."B-1 Lancer 



Ellsworth AFB 



28th Munitions Squadron 



Navy mines
SOLITARIO RESOURCES CORPORATION



SOLITARIO RESOURCES CORPORATION



1994 STOCK OPTION PLAN



SEVENTH AMENDMENT



 
Pursuant to a resolution unanimously passed by the Board of Directors on March 7, 2002, and subsequently approved by appropriate regulatory authorities and an affirmative vote of the shareholders, the Company's 1994 Stock Option Plan, as amended, is modified as follows:



The second sentence in Section 2 shall be amended from: 



"The number of shares of Common Stock that may be subject to options granted under this Plan shall not exceed 3,136,000 shares of Common Stock, as such Common Stock was constituted on the effective date of this Plan, or such greater number as may be approved from time to time by the shareholders of the Company."



To the Following:



"The number of shares of Common Stock that may be subject to options granted under this Plan shall not exceed 3,736,000 shares of Common Stock, as such Common Stock was constituted on the effective date of this Plan, or such greater number as may be approved from time to time by the shareholders of the Company."



No other changes to the 1994 Stock Option Plan are made as a result of this Seventh Amendment to the Plan.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 85 (Monday, May 22, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S7027]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                                 prayer

  The Chaplain, Dr. Lloyd John Ogilvie, offered the following prayer:
  Let us pray:
  Lord of history, we gain perspective on the perplexities of the 
present by remembering how Your power has been released in response to 
prayer in the past. We think of Washington on his knees, of Franklin 
asking for prayer when the Constitutional Convention was deadlocked, of 
Lincoln praying for wisdom in the dark night of our Nation's divided 
soul. Gratefully, also we remember Your answers to prayers seeking Your 
strength in struggles and Your courage in crises. Most of all, today we 
remember those times when Your guidance brought consensus out of 
conflict, and creative decisions out of discord.
  In the midst of the continuing discussion and debate over the budget, 
once again we need Your divine intervention and inspiration. Watch over 
this Senate during this strategic week. May the Senators be united in 
seeking Your best for the future of our Nation. Give them strength to 
communicate their perception of truth with mutual respect and without 
rancor. We are of one voice in asking for Your blessing on this Senate 
as it exercises the essence of democracy in this vital debate. You have 
been our guide over the 206 years of the history of the Senate of the 
United States, and we trust You to lead us forward today. In Your holy 
name. Amen.

                          ____________________
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-2291

EPHRAIM U. ETOKIE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

THE DISABILITY ACTION CENTER, INCORPORATED,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief

District Judge. (CA-02-1701-3)

Submitted: January 15, 2004 Decided: January 27, 2004

Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ephraim U. Etokie, Appellant Pro Se. Herbert E. Buhl, III,

Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Ephraim U. Etokie appeals the district court’s order

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge granting

summary judgment to his former employer in his civil action

alleging discrimination under various statutes. We have reviewed

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on

the reasoning of the district court. See Etokie v. The Disability

Action Ctr., Inc., No. CA-02-1701-3 (D.S.C. Sept. 15, 2003). 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.

AFFIRMED
422 A.2d 1163

#### Commonwealth v. Thompson, Appellant.

Sub*624mitted April 12, 1979.

Lester G. Nauhaus, Public Defender, for appellant; Robert L. Eberhardt, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Before CERCONE, P. J., and WIEAND and HOFFMAN, JJ.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
#### B. D. McKie, Ex’r, v. H. & O. Echols.

(No. 2422, Op. Book No. 2, p. 648.)

Appeal from Navarro County.

Opinion by

Watts, J.

§ 1282. *Jurisdiction; plea of privilege by executor or ■administrator; requisites of.*McKie was sued as executor in Navarro county. He resided in Bell county, and pleaded to the jurisdiction of the court his privilege to be sued in the latter county. *Held,*the statute provides that a suit against an executor or administrator, to es*744tablisli a moneyed, demand against an estate, must be brought in the county where the estate is being administered; [R. S. 1198.] The rule of law is well recognized, that, in asserting his privilege to be sued in a particular county, the defendant must, by proper averments, give' the plaintiff' a better writ. As appellant was sued as executor upon what was claimed to be a moneyed demand against the estate he represented, it was necessary in his plea to aver in what county that estate was being administered. Failing to do this, his plea did not give the plaintiff a better writ, and was defective, and the court-did not err in striking it out.

June 14, 1882.

§ 1283. *Executed contract; money paid on; suit to recover back.*Appellees rented of appellant, as executor of an estate, a tract of land for the term of one year, and paid appellant $200 rent money-. The land was at the time in litigation, and the result of that litigation was-that the estate lost the land. At the time of the renting,, and the payment of the rent money, appellees had full knowledge of all the facts, and there was no mistake of fact or fraud in the transaction. *Held,*appellees, by their contract with appellant, became his tenants, and under the general rule would not be heard to deny his title to the land. They could only avoid their contract by showing that it was induced" by fraud, or originated in a mistake of fact. There was ample consideration to support the contract, for under it appellees had the use and possession of the land, while appellant was deprived of the same thereby. The facts do not support the judgment in favor of appellees.

Reversed and remanded-
581 A.2d 83

#### IN THE MATTER OF VICTOR LIBRIZZI, JR., AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.

October 19, 1990.

ORDER

This matter having been duly presented to the Court, it is ORDERED that the petition for reinstatement is granted; subject, however to the condition that respondent shall submit an annual certified audit of his trust account records for the calendar years 1990, 1991 and 1992, said audits to be filed with the Office of Attorney Ethics within 30 days of the conclusion of each year.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DERRICK LEE LYONS,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

MULTNOMAH COUNTY; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 17

- 35849

D.C. No. 3:14

- cv

- 01793

- YY

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Oregon

Michael H. Simon, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 8, 2018 **

Portland, Oregon

Before: TALLMAN and IKUTA, Circuit Judges, and BOUGH, *** District Judge.

Derrick Lyons a

ppeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate

judge’s finding and recommendation and granting summary judgment for

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Stephen R. Bough, Un ited States District Judge for the

Western District of Missouri, sitting by designation. 

# FILED

NOV 21 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 17

- 35849

Defendants on Lyons’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim of inadequate medical care while

he was a pretrial detainee. We have jurisdiction o ver Lyons’s appeal under 28

U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo

. Fair

Hous. Council of Riverside Cty., Inc. v. Riverside Two , 249 F.3d 1132, 1135 (9th

Cir. 2001). Summary judgment is appropriate whe n “there is no genuine dispute as

to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). In making this determination, courts view all facts and

reasonable inferences therefrom in the light most favorable to the nonmoving

pa rty. Davis v. United States , 854 F.3d 594, 598 (9th Cir. 2017). This Court may

affirm the district court on any ground supported by the record. Experian Info.

Sols., Inc. v. Nationwide Mktg. Servs. Inc. , 893 F.3d 1176, 1187 (9th Cir. 2018).

Here, although the district court did not have the benefit of Gordon v.

County of Orange , 888 F.3d 1118 (9th Cir. 2018)

, there is sufficient evidence in

the record to affirm the district court. The record shows no objective deliberate

indifference by Defendants in response to Lyons’s dental issue given the frequency

of medical appointments and the lack of any evidence that it was a dental

emergency

. See id. at 1124

– 25 . Therefore, nothing in the record gives rise t o a

genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Defendants ’ conduct was objectively

unreasonable

.3 17

- 35849

Affirmed.
583 A.2d 347

#### IN RE SAINT BARNABAS MEDICAL CENTER UNCOMPENSATED CARE AUDIT ADJUSTMENTS.

March 26, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.