alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 21.3 Application. ( a ) This part applies to any program for which Federal financial assistance is authorized under a law administered by the Department, including the types of Federal financial assistance listed in appendix A to this part. It also applies to money paid, property transferred, or other Federal financial assistance extended after the effective date of this part pursuant to an application approved before that effective date. This part does not apply to: ( 1 ) Any Federal financial assistance by way of insurance or guaranty contracts;
( 2 ) Money paid, property transferred, or other assistance extended before the effective date of this part, except where such assistance was subject to the title VI regulations of any agency whose responsibilities are now exercised by this Department;
( 3 ) Any assistance to any individual who is the ultimate beneficiary; or
( 4 ) Any employment practice, under any such program, of any employer, employment agency, or labor organization, except to the extent described in § 21.5(c). The fact that a type of Federal financial assistance is not listed in appendix A to this part shall not mean, if title VI of the Act is otherwise applicable, that a program is not covered. Other types of Federal financial assistance under statutes now in force or hereinafter enacted may be added to appendix A to this part.
( b ) In any program receiving Federal financial assistance in the form, or for the acquisition, of real property or an interest in real property, to the extent that rights to space on, over, or under any such property are included as part of the program receiving that assistance, the nondiscrimination requirement of this part shall extend to any facility located wholly or in part in that space.
# C_2010221EN.01006002.xml

| 14.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 221/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 221/60

---

Action brought on 11 June 2010 — Kaser/Commission

(Case F-45/10)

()

2010/C 221/96

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Ferdinand Kaser (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M. Schober, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

The subject matter and description of the proceedings

The subject matter and description of the proceedings

First, annulment of the Decision of the European Commission CMS 07/046 removing applicant from his post, without reduction of the pension rights, witch took effect on 15 August 2009 and the annulment of all decisions taken against the applicant in the period between September 2003 until the removing from the post and, second, a claim for damages.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claim that the Court should:

| — | Annul the Decision CMS 07/046 due to harassment, mismanagement and the abuse of the fundamental right to be heard; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Decision CMS 07/046 due to harassment, mismanagement and the abuse of the fundamental right to be heard;

| — | annul all decisions taken by the Appointing Authority against the applicant between the period September 2003 until the removing from the post due to harassment and mismanagement due to the abuse of the right of the applicant to be heard; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul all decisions taken by the Appointing Authority against the applicant between the period September 2003 until the removing from the post due to harassment and mismanagement due to the abuse of the right of the applicant to be heard;

| — | enable a hearing of the applicant according to Article 7(1) and Article 24 of the Staff Regulations, and to refer to the submitted requests in February 2008 and March 2008; |
| --- | --- |

—

enable a hearing of the applicant according to Article 7(1) and Article 24 of the Staff Regulations, and to refer to the submitted requests in February 2008 and March 2008;

| — | grant a symbolic compensation of one (1) Euro to the applicant in order to compensate his moral and professional prejudice he suffered as exposed in the present complaint, as far as the objective of such a complaint is not money but recognition of dignity and professional reputation of the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

grant a symbolic compensation of one (1) Euro to the applicant in order to compensate his moral and professional prejudice he suffered as exposed in the present complaint, as far as the objective of such a complaint is not money but recognition of dignity and professional reputation of the applicant.

---
PACE

Post Application Coverage Endorsement 

2022 PACE Status: Current Expansion
# C_2011046EN.01001603.xml

| 12.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 46/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 46/16

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal of 16 December 2010 — Merhzaoui v Council of the European Union

(Case F-52/10) (1)

1

2011/C 46/32

Language of the case: French

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 221, 14.8.2010, p. 61.

1

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

STAKEHOLDER ANNOUNCEMENT

USDA Invites Applications for Grants to Help Disadvantaged Groups

WASHINGTON, May 30, 2018 – Assistant to the Secretary for Rural Development Anne Hazlett today 

announced that USDA is seeking applications for grants under the Socially-Disadvantaged Groups Grant 

program.

The purpose of this program is to provide technical assistance to socially-disadvantaged groups in rural areas. 

Eligible applicants include cooperatives, groups of cooperatives and cooperative development centers. This 

program supports Rural Development’s mission of improving the quality of life for rural Americans and 

commitment to direct agency resources to those who most need them. A socially-disadvantaged group is one 

whose members have been subjected to racial, ethnic or gender prejudice because of their identity as members 

of a group without regard to their individual qualities. A majority of the applicant’s board of directors or 

governing board must be comprised of individuals who are members of socially-disadvantaged groups.

For FY 2018, USDA plans to award up to $3 million in grants. The maximum grant award is $175,000. 

Grants may be used to develop and operate a Rural Cooperative Development Center that could provide the 

following technical assistance and other services to rural businesses:

• Conducting feasibility studies

• Developing business plans

• Providing leadership and operational improvement training

Paper applications are due July 30, 2018. Electronic applications are due July 24, 2018. Questions about the 

application process may be directed to the Rural Development State Office where the applicant is located. For a

list of offices, visit the state office website. For more information, see page 24719 of the May 30 Federal 

Register.

USDA encourages applications that will support recommendations made in the report to the President from 

the Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity to help improve life in rural America. Applicants are 

encouraged to consider projects that provide measurable results in helping rural communities build robust and 

sustainable economies through strategic investments in infrastructure, partnerships and innovation. Key 

strategies include:

• Achieving e-Connectivity for Rural America

• Developing the Rural Economy

• Harnessing Technological Innovation

• Supporting a Rural Workforce

• Improving Quality of Life

#
#### § 22.27 Ex Parte Communications [Rule 27].

No member of the Board shall entertain, nor shall any person directly or indirectly involved in an appeal submit to the Board, any evidence, explanation, analysis, or advice, whether written or oral, regarding any matter at issue in an appeal without the knowledge and consent of the adverse party. This provision does not apply to consultation among Board members or to ex parte communications concerning the Board's administrative functions or procedures.
| **RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS (Details) (USD $)**              | 3 Months Ended |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------|
||
| **Partnership Management Fee and Reporting Fee [Line Items]** |           |   |
| Gross Partnership Management Fee                              | $ 1,332        | $ 7,230 |
| Series One [Member]                                           |           |   |
| **Partnership Management Fee and Reporting Fee [Line Items]** |           |   |
| Gross Partnership Management Fee                              | 0              | 0 |
| Series Two [Member]                                           |           |   |
| **Partnership Management Fee and Reporting Fee [Line Items]** |           |   |
| Gross Partnership Management Fee                              | 0              | 0 |
| Series Three [Member]                                         |           |   |
| **Partnership Management Fee and Reporting Fee [Line Items]** |           |   |
| Gross Partnership Management Fee                              | 1,332          | 7,230 |
| Series Four [Member]                                          |           |   |
| **Partnership Management Fee and Reporting Fee [Line Items]** |           |   |
| Gross Partnership Management Fee                              | 0              | 0 |
| Series Five [Member]                                          |           |   |
| **Partnership Management Fee and Reporting Fee [Line Items]** |           |   |
| Gross Partnership Management Fee                              | 0              | 0 |
| Series Six [Member]                                           |           |   |
| **Partnership Management Fee and Reporting Fee [Line Items]** |           |   |
| Gross Partnership Management Fee                              | $ 0            | $ 0 |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Gross amount of management fee during the period.
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**bctc_GrossManagementFee**Namespace Prefix:**bctc_**Data Type:**xbrli:monetaryItemType**Balance Type:**debit**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                              |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**bctc_PartnershipManagementFeeAndReportingFeeLineItems**Namespace Prefix:**bctc_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         1033662
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   163581
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1198050
<PP&E>                                        17955961
<DEPRECIATION>                                 4155950
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                15364250
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           683841
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    14548409
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  15364250
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                525836
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   103785
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                167455
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 254596
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             254596
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    254596
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     5.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     5.10
        

</TABLE>
STAKEHOLDER ANNOUNCEMENT

USDA Announces the 2018 Multi-Family Housing Program Site Managers and 

Maintenance Person of the Year Awardees

ARLINGTON, VA June 20, 2018 — Department of Agriculture Rural Housing Service Administrator Joel 

Baxley today announced the selection of the National Multi-Family Housing Site Managers and Maintenance 

Person of the Year for 2018. The awards were presented in front of Rural Development staff and family 

members of the winners at the Council for Affordable and Rural Housing’s (CARH) Annual Meeting.

Site managers and maintenance personnel are an essential component of success for the nearly 424,400 rural 

rental housing units funded by Rural Development loans. They ensure a smooth day-to-day operation of the 

housing properties they manage, and they often invest their own free time and resources for the low-income 

families, elderly residents, and farm workers they serve.

This year, the awards were presented for four categories: Family Housing, Elderly Housing, Farm Labor 

Housing, and Maintenance Person of the Year. A panel of housing professionals from CARH and 

representatives from Rural Development made the selections. The winners were selected from 40 nominations 

spanning 18 states.

These are the 2018 Awardees:

• Family Housing—Erika Keaton (Apple Hill Apartments)

o Premier Management LLC, Jackson, Ohio — 40 units

• Elderly Housing—Carla Hutto (Williston Elderly Apartments)

o GEM Management LLC, Williston, South Carolina — 24 units 

• Farm Labor Housing—Lizbeth Lozano (Sugarloaf Apartments)

o Partnership Property Management, Hendersonville, North Carolina — 44 units

• Maintenance Person of the Year—Steve Anderson (Village Apartments of Seymour I)

o Village Management Company, Inc., Seymour, Indiana — 24 units

Selection criteria for these awards were based upon tenant satisfaction with the manager or maintenance 

person, curb appeal of the property, timeliness and competency of maintenance, accurate and complete 

recordkeeping with no incidents of noncompliance, and actions of the manager consistently above and beyond 

the required duties of the job. 

#

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.
#### § 534.1 General.

Fish that are harvested for use as human food must have grown and lived under conditions that will not render the fish or their products unsound, unwholesome, unhealthful, or otherwise unfit for human food.
### §1681c–3. Adverse information in cases of trafficking

#### (a) Definitions

In this section:

#### (1) Trafficking documentation

The term "trafficking documentation" means—

(A) documentation of—

(i) a determination that a consumer is a victim of trafficking made by a Federal, State, or Tribal governmental entity; or

(ii) by a court of competent jurisdiction; and

(B) documentation that identifies items of adverse information that should not be furnished by a consumer reporting agency because the items resulted from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking of which the consumer is a victim.

#### (2) Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 definitions

The terms "severe forms of trafficking in persons" and "sex trafficking" have the meanings given, respectively, in section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7102).

#### (3) Victim of trafficking

The term "victim of trafficking" means a person who is a victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking.

#### (b) Adverse information

A consumer reporting agency may not furnish a consumer report containing any adverse item of information about a consumer that resulted from a severe form of trafficking in persons or sex trafficking if the consumer has provided trafficking documentation to the consumer reporting agency.

#### (c) Rulemaking

#### (1) In general

Not later than 180 days after December 27, 2021, the Director shall issue rules to implement subsection (a).

#### (2) Contents

The rules issued pursuant to paragraph (1) shall establish a method by which consumers shall submit trafficking documentation to consumer reporting agencies.

(Pub. L. 90–321, title VI, §605C, as added Pub. L. 117–81, div. F, title LXI, §6102(a), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2383.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 117–81, div. F, title LXI, §6102(c), Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2384, provided that: "The amendments made by this section [enacting this section] shall apply on the date that is 30 days after the date on which the Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection issues a rule pursuant to section 605C(c) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act [15 U.S.C. 1681c–3(c)], as added by subsection (a) of this section. Any rule issued by the Director to implement such section 605C [15 U.S.C. 1681c–3] shall be limited to preventing a consumer reporting agency from furnishing a consumer report containing any adverse item of information about a consumer (as such terms are defined, respectively, in section 603 the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a)) that resulted from trafficking."
### SUBCHAPTER II—LOANS TO FARMERS BY LAND BANK COMMISSIONER
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1280 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1280

 To terminate the exemption of certain contractors and other entities 
  from civil penalties for violations of nuclear safety requirements 
                  under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 24, 1999

   Mr. Bryan introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To terminate the exemption of certain contractors and other entities 
  from civil penalties for violations of nuclear safety requirements 
                  under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
    (a) Subsection b. (2) of section 234A of the Atomic Energy Act of 
1954 (42 U.S.C. 2282a) is amended by striking the second sentence.
    (b) Specified Contractors.--That section is further amended by 
striking subsection d.
    (c) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section shall take 
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with 
respect to violations specified in section 234A of the Atomic Energy 
Act of 1954 that occur on or after that date.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2010288EN.01005302.xml

| 23.10.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 288/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.10.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 288/53

---

Action brought on 26 August 2010 — Milux v OHMI (HEARTCONTROL)

(Case T-350/10)

()

(2010/C 288/99)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Milux Holding SA (Luxembourg, Luxembourg) (represented by: J. Bojs, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 2 July 2010 in case R 1437/2009-4; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 2 July 2010 in case R 1437/2009-4;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘HEARTCONTROL’ for goods and services in classes 9, 10 and 44

Decision of the examiner: Refused the application for a Community trade mark

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Pleas in law: Infringement of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal misapplied the principle of non-discrimination to the facts in this case; in the alternative, infringement of Articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal erred in its conclusion that the trade mark applied for does not possess sufficient inherent distinctiveness.

---
### §541. Tax on circulating notes generally

In lieu of all existing taxes, every association shall pay to the Treasurer of the United States, in the months of January and July, a duty of one-half of 1 per centum each half year upon the average amount of its notes in circulation.

(R.S. §5214; Mar. 3, 1883, ch. 121, §1, 22 Stat. 488.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

R.S. §5214 derived from act June 3, 1864, ch. 106, §41, 13 Stat. 111, which was part of the National Bank Act. See section 38 of this title.
**THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

**Post Office Box 12248**

**Austin, Texas 78711**

**(512) 463-1312**

March 28, 2008

Ms. Cynthia Keely Timms

Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell , LLP

2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 2200

Dallas, TX 75201-6776

Mr. John A. Goren

Attorney at Law

11308-D Park Central Place

Dallas, TX 75230

RE:Case Number:  05-0022

Court of Appeals Number:  05-03-01603-CV

Trial Court Number:  DV00-01494-F

Style:COUNTY OF DALLAS

v.

CHRISTOPHER SHAWN SEMPE AND CARL RAYMOND SEMPE, SOLE HEIRS OF CHARLES RAY SEMPE

Dear Counsel:

Today the Supreme Court of Texas withdraws its order of May 26, 2006, granting the petition for review, and the petition was improvidently granted.  The petition for review is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  The Court issued the enclosed per curiam opinion in the above-referenced case.  

Sincerely,

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

by Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk

Enclosures

**Case No. 05-0022Page 1**
#### § 201.98 Packers and dealers not to charge, demand, or collect commission, yardage, or other service charges.

No packer or dealer shall, in connection with the purchase of livestock in commerce, charge, demand, or collect from the seller of the livestock any compensation in the form of commission, yardage, or other service charge unless the charge is for services mandated by law or statute and is not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act.

[61 FR 36282, July 10, 1996]