alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §205g. Gifts, donations and bequests to Board

#### (a) Authorization; deposit into Treasury and disbursement

The Board may accept, hold, administer, and utilize gifts, donations, and bequests of property, both real and personal, and personal services, for the purpose of aiding or facilitating the work of the Board. Gifts and bequests of money, and the proceeds from the sale of any other property received as gifts or requests, shall be deposited in the Treasury in a separate fund and shall be disbursed upon order of the Board.

#### (b) Federal income, estate, and gift taxation of property

For purpose of Federal income, estate, and gift taxation, property accepted under subsection (a) of this section shall be considered as a gift or bequest to or for the use of the United States.

#### (c) Investment of moneys; disbursement of accrued income

Upon the request of the Board, the Secretary of the Treasury may invest and reinvest, in securities of the United States, any moneys contained in the fund authorized in subsection (a) of this section. Income accruing from such securities, and from any other property accepted to the credit of such fund, shall be dispersed upon the order of the Board.

#### (d) Reversion to Treasury of unexpended funds

Funds not expended by the Board as of the date when it ceases to exist, in accordance with section 205d(d) of this title, shall revert to the Treasury of the United States as of such date.

(Pub. L. 94–168, §8, Dec. 23, 1975, 89 Stat. 1011.)
Mental Retardation 

FACT SHEET 

What is mental retardation? 

Mental retardation, also known as intellectual disability, is 

a term used when there are limits to a person’s ability to 

learn at an expected level and function in daily life. Levels 

of mental retardation vary greatly in children – from a 

very slight problem to a very severe problem. Children 

with mental retardation might have a hard time letting 

others know their wants and needs, and taking care of 

themselves. Mental retardation could cause a child to 

learn and develop more slowly than other children of the 

same age. It could take longer for a child with mental 

retardation to learn to speak, walk, dress, or eat without 

help, and they could have trouble learning in school. 

Mental retardation can be caused by a problem that starts 

any time before a child turns 18 years old – even before 

birth. It can be caused by injury, disease, or a problem 

in the brain. For many children, the cause of their mental 

retardation is not known. Some of the most common 

known causes of mental retardation – like Down syndrome, 

fetal alcohol syndrome, fragile X syndrome, genetic 

conditions, birth defects, and infections – happen before 

birth. Others happen while a baby is being born or 

soon after birth. Still other causes of mental retardation 

do not occur until a child is older; these might include 

serious head injury, stroke, or certain infections. 

What are some of the signs of 

mental retardation? 

Usually, the more severe the degree of mental retardation, 

the earlier the signs can be noticed. However, it might 

still be hard to tell how young children will be affected 

later in life. 

There are many signs of mental retardation. For example, 

children with mental retardation may: 

■ sit up, crawl, or walk later than other children 

■ learn to talk later, or have trouble speaking 

■ find it hard to remember things 

■ have trouble understanding social rules 

■ have trouble seeing the results of their actions 

■ have trouble solving problems 

What can I do if I think my child 

may have mental retardation? 

Talk with your child’s doctor or nurse. If you or your 

doctor think there could be a problem, you can take 

your child to see a developmental pediatrician or 

other specialist, and you can contact your local early 

intervention agency (for children under 3) or public 

school (for children 3 and older). To find out who to 

speak to in your area, you can contact the National 

Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities by 

logging on to www.nichcy.org or 

calling 1-800-695-0285. In addition, the Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has links to 

information for families (www.cdc.gov/ncbddd).

To help your child reach his or her full potential, it is very 

important to get help for him or her as early as possible! 

1-800-CDC-INFO www.cdc.gov/actearly


Learn the Signs. Act Early.
§ 77.10 Interstate movement from modified accredited advanced States and zones. Cattle or bison that originate in a modified accredited advanced State or zone, and that are not known to be infected with or exposed to tuberculosis, may be moved interstate only in accordance with 9 CFR part 86 and, if moved anywhere other than directly to slaughter at a recognized slaughtering establishment, under one of the following additional conditions: ( a ) The cattle or bison are sexually intact heifers moved to an approved feedlot, or are steers or spayed heifers, and are officially identified.
( b ) The cattle or bison are from an accredited herd, are officially identified, and are accompanied by an ICVI stating that the accredited herd completed the testing necessary for accredited status with negative results within 1 year prior to the date of movement.
( c ) The cattle or bison are sexually intact animals; are not from an accredited herd; are officially identified; and are accompanied by an ICVI stating that they were negative to an official tuberculin test conducted within 60 days prior to the date of movement.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control numbers 0579-0146, 0579-0220, and 0579-0229) [78 FR 2065, Jan. 9, 2013]
#### Ruesch International, Inc., Respondent, v City & Suburban Federal Savings Bank, Appellant.

[823 NYS2d 386]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane S. Solomon, J.), entered November 2, 2005, awarding plaintiff the principal sum of $105,000, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered October 20, 2005, which granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

This action was amenable to summary relief because plaintiff adequately established defendant’s obligation to repay funds it had paid to defendant on a check dishonored by the drawee *225bank, and defendant’s failure to make payment thereon *(see DDS Partners v Celenza,*6 AD3d 347 [2004]). The purported defense of having processed the check in a timely fashion and in good faith (UCC 3-419 [3]) is unavailing because the conversion here was not between a depositary bank and a true owner, but rather between a bank and a nonbanking institution to which it had negotiated a check *(cf. Moore v Richmond Hill Sav. Bank,*117 AD2d 27 [1986]). Concur—Tom, J.E, Mazzarelli, Andrias, Sweeny and Malone, JJ.
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

	 	 	 	 	 	 				

STAKEHOLDER ANNOUNCEMENT 

CORRECTION: 

USDA inadvertently used the incorrect reference number for the RESP Notice of Comments

that was published in the May 24 Federal Register. The correct number is: 7 CRF 1710.101.

USDA regrets the error and has submitted a notice of correction to the Federal Register.  

****************** 

USDA Seeks Comments on Ways to Measure and Verify Energy Savings Under New Rural Energy 

Savings Program

(May 24, 2016) – Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack today announced that USDA is seeking comments on how 

the Rural Utilities Service should develop the Rural Energy Savings Program (RESP). This is a new program 

recently authorized by Congress. 

The purpose of RESP is to help rural families and small businesses reduce energy use. USDA will provide loans 

to RUS borrowers that will re-lend money to qualified consumers to implement cost-effective energy efficiency 

measures. 

USDA seeks input on how to provide technical assistance and training to the employees of eligible entities, and 

ways to measure and verify provisions of RESP. 

Written comments are due June 23, 2016. For more information, please see page 32719 of the May 24 Federal 

Register. 

# 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.
#### § 72.21 Animals infested with or exposed to ticks subject to same restrictions as cattle.

Animals other than cattle which are infested with ticks [Boophilus annulatus (Margaropus annulatus), Boophilus microplus, or Rhipicephalus evertsi evertsi] or exposed to tick infestation shall not be moved interstate unless they are treated, handled, and moved in accordance with the requirements specified in §§ 72.9 through 72.15 and § 72.18 of this part governing the interstate movement of cattle.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 20638 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
LAWRENCE STOWE, also known as Dr. Larry Stowe , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:11

- CR

- 803

- 1

Before KING, SOUTHWICK, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Lawrence Stowe, federal prisoner #44190

- 424, previously filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, which the district court denied. We dismissed the resulting appeal based on Stowe’s failure to file a timely notice of appeal. See United States v. Stowe, No. 18

- 201 71 (5th Cir. June 21, 2018). Following our dismissal, Stowe filed a “Motion to Correct Plain Error” in the district court, which purportedly was based on Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b) and

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 17, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-20638 Document: 00514920458 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/17/2019No. 18

- 20638

2 Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4. The district cou rt construed this as a motion to extend the time to file a timely notice of appeal and to reinstate the prior appeal. However, the district court dismissed the motion for lack of jurisdiction. Stowe appeals the dismissal of t his motion and requests the

a ppointment of counsel on appeal.
Stowe has not shown that the district court erred. To the extent he argues that his notice of appeal from his underlying Section 2255 motion was timely , we have already found it untimely and dismissed that appeal. Issues of fact or law previously decided on appeal may not be reexamined by a district

court or in a subsequent appeal. See United States v. Davis
, 609 F.3d 663, 693 (5th Cir. 20 10 ) ; see also Bowles v. Russell
, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007) (stating
that e quitable e xceptions do not apply to the period for filing a notice of appeal
in a civil action and that use of the “ ‘ unique circumstances ’ doctrine is illegitimate ” ). Construction of Stowe’s motion as a motion to extend or reopen the time to file a notice of appeal pursuant to Rule 4 is unavailing. Even if we had not already decided the timeliness of his appeal , such a motion would itself be untimely under both Rule 4(a)(5) and Rule 4(a)(6). Stowe’s reliance on Rule 52(b) also is misplaced. Rule 52 defines plain error in criminal proceedings on appeal and does not provide a mechanism for challeng es in the district court. Thus, a Rule 52(b) motion would be “meaningless” and “unauthorized,” and the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider it as such. See Uni ted States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 142 (5th Cir. 1994).
W e conclude that the district court did not err in finding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider Stowe’s motion. AFFIRMED; MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DENIED. Case: 18-20638 Document: 00514920458 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/17/2019
Exhibit






AMENDMENT No. 3 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT


THIS AMENDMENT No. 3 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (“Amendment No. 3”), is entered into as of November 24, 2015, by and between Third Point Reinsurance Ltd., a Bermuda company (the “Company”), and J. Robert Bredahl (the “Executive”).


WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive entered into a certain Employment Agreement dated as of January 26, 2012, an Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement dated as of November 10, 2014 and an Amendment No. 2 to Employment Agreement dated as of March 1, 2015 (the “Employment Agreement”); and


WHEREAS, in consideration of the mutual agreements set forth below and for other good and valuable consideration given by each party to this Amendment No. 3 to the other, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Company and Executive agree to amend the Employment Agreement on the terms set forth below.


NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:


1.     Section 2(a) of the Employment Agreement shall be amended to read in its entirety as follows:


 (a)  Duties. During the Employment Term and from and after November 24, 2015, the Executive shall serve as the President and Chief Operating Officer of the Company and the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Underwriting Officer of Third Point Reinsurance Company Ltd. In his capacity as President and Chief Operating Officer of the Company and Chief Executive Officer and Chief Underwriting Officer of Third Point Reinsurance Company Ltd., the Executive shall perform such duties, services, and responsibilities on behalf of the Company and Third Point Reinsurance Company Ltd. consistent with such position as may be reasonably assigned to the Executive from time to time by the Chief Executive Officer of the Company. In performing such duties hereunder for the Company, the Executive shall report directly to the Chief Executive Officer and in performing such duties hereunder for Third Point Reinsurance Company Ltd., the Executive shall report to the Board of Directors of Third Point Reinsurance Company Ltd.”


2.    The parties hereto agree that except as specifically set forth in this Amendment No. 3, each and every provision of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force and effect as set forth therein.


[Signature Page Follows]


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment No. 2 to be executed, and the Executive has hereunto set his hand, in each case effective as of the day and year first above written.
THIRD POINT REINSURANCE LTD.
_By: /s/ John R. Berger                
_Name: John R. Berger 
Title: Chairman and Chief Executive Officer




_By: /s/ Christopher S. Coleman        
NName: Christopher S. Coleman 
Title: Chief Financial Officer




EXECUTIVE


/s/ J. Robert Bredahl                 
J. Robert Bredahl
### §3909. Aircraft deemed public aircraft

While assigned to authorized Coast Guard duty, any aircraft shall be deemed to be a Coast Guard aircraft, a public vessel of the United States, and a vessel of the Coast Guard within the meaning of sections 937 and 938 of this title and other applicable provisions of law. Subject to the provisions of sections 3904 and 3912 of this title, while assigned to duty, qualified Auxiliary pilots shall be deemed to be Coast Guard pilots.

(Aug. 4, 1949, ch. 393, 63 Stat. 556, §828; Pub. L. 104–324, title IV, §407, Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3925; renumbered §3909 and amended Pub. L. 115–282, title I, §§119(b), 123(b)(2), Dec. 4, 2018, 132 Stat. 4236, 4240.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 14, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §266a (Feb. 19, 1941, ch. 8, title I, §7A, as added Sept. 30, 1944, ch. 453, §4, 58 Stat. 760).

The last clause of said section is eliminated because it might be construed to exempt planes of members from being licensed according to law.

Changes were made in phraseology. 81st Congress, House Report No. 557.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–282, §123(b)(2), substituted "sections 937 and 938" for "sections 646 and 647" and "sections 3904 and 3912" for "sections 823a and 831".

Pub. L. 115–282, §119(b), renumbered section 828 of this title as this section.

1996—Pub. L. 104–324 reenacted section catchline without change and amended text generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "Any aircraft, while assigned to authorized Coast Guard duty shall be deemed to be a vessel of the Coast Guard within the meaning of section 646 of this title."
### **CHAPTER 50—CONSUMER PRODUCT WARRANTIES**

Sec.
2301.
Definitions.
2302.
Rules governing contents of warranties.
2303.
Designation of written warranties.
2304.
Federal minimum standards for warranties.
2305.
Full and limited warranting of a consumer product.
2306.
Service contracts; rules for full, clear and conspicuous disclosure of terms and conditions; addition to or in lieu of written warranty.
2307.
Designation of representatives by warrantor to perform duties under written or implied warranty.
2308.
Implied warranties.
2309.
Procedures applicable to promulgation of rules by Commission.
2310.
Remedies in consumer disputes.
2311.
Applicability to other laws.
2312.
Effective dates.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         524,181
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,118,206
<ALLOWANCES>                                    32,000
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,669,435
<PP&E>                                       7,786,383
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,487,232
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,885,559
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,110,404
<BONDS>                                     22,886,652
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,400
<OTHER-SE>                                (10,725,816)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,885,559
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,613,205
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  596,406
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             503,770
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (529,628)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (541,628)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (541,628)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.42)
        

</TABLE>
#### § 381.101 Official U.S. Condemned mark.

The term “U.S. Condemned” as shown below is an official mark and the devices used by the Department for applying such mark are official devices.

[![](https://img.federalregister.gov/EC11SE91.039/EC11SE91.039_large.png)](https://img.federalregister.gov/EC11SE91.039/EC11SE91.039_original_size.png)
# C_2010161EN.01004801.xml

| 19.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/48

---

Action brought on 15 April 2010 — Commission v SEMEA

(Case T-168/10)

(2010/C 161/76)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: S. Petrova, Agent and E. Bouttier, lawyer)

Defendant: Société d’économie mixte d’équipement de l’Aveyron (SEMEA) (Millau, France)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | order the société d’économie mixte de l’Aveyron, in the person of its ad hoc agent, to pay the applicant the principal sum of EUR 41,012, plus interest outstanding since 10 March 1992 or, in the alternative, from 27 April 1993; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the société d’économie mixte de l’Aveyron, in the person of its ad hoc agent, to pay the applicant the principal sum of EUR 41,012, plus interest outstanding since 10 March 1992 or, in the alternative, from 27 April 1993;

| — | order the capitalisation of interest; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the capitalisation of interest;

| — | order the SEMEA to pay EUR 5 000 in respect of wrongful obstruction of legal process; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the SEMEA to pay EUR 5 000 in respect of wrongful obstruction of legal process;

| — | order the SEMEA to pay the costs of this case. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the SEMEA to pay the costs of this case.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The European Community, represented by the Commission, concluded on 6 July 1990 with the Société d’économie mixte d’équipement de l’Aveyron (the Aveyron semi-public installations company) (SEMEA) a grant contract concerning a local development action consisting in the performance of work for the preparation and launching of a Centre Européen d’Entreprise Locale (European Local Enterprise Centre) in Millau.

The Commission claims that under that contract, the SEMEA undertook to perform various services and to account for them to the Commission by submitting periodical reports, the Commission for its part undertaking to contribute financially to the performance of those works up to a maximum of ECU 135,000, not exceeding 50 % of the justified costs of the works.

In May 1991, the SEMEA requested from the Commission that that contract might be performed by another structure, the Association CEI12, which the Commission accepted, specifying that that agreement did not exempt the SEMEA from its obligations, and the SEMEA thus confirmed that it would guarantee the proper performance of the services provided for in the contract.

Following a check on the state of progress of the works, it was found that the total eligible expenditure was ECU 187,977 and thus, that the Commission’s contribution was to be set at 50 % of that amount, that is, at ECU 93,988.

In so far as the SEMEA has already received ECU 135,000 in respect of the contract, this action seeks to claim from the SEMEA the recovery of the overpayment.

---
#### § 93.319 Import permit and declaration for horses.

For all horses offered for importation from or transiting through regions of Central America or of the West Indies, the importer or his or her agent shall have obtained an import permit under § 93.304 and shall present two copies of a declaration as provided in § 93.305.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0579-0485)

[88 FR 63004, Sept. 14, 2023]
USDA GUS TRAINING

GUS BORROWER INFORMATION PAGE
Training Objectives

Gain an understanding of how to complete each section of the Borrower Information 

page in GUS:

• Personal Information 

• Current Employment/Self Employment and Income

• Previous Employment/Self Employment and Income

• Income from Other Sources
GUS Borrower Information: Personal Information 
GUS Borrower Information: Address Information 
GUS Borrower Information: “Add” and “Remove” Button Functionality
GUS Borrower Information: Current Employment/Self Employment and Income 
GUS Borrower Information: Current Employment/Self Employment and Income, 

Continued... 
GUS Borrower Information: Previous Employment/Self Employment and Income
GUS Borrower Information: Income from Other Sources
GUS Borrower Information: Add Additional Borrower
GUS Borrower Information: Collapsed Sections
GUS Borrower Information: Page Completion
End Slide 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.