alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 236.18 Termination of Family Unity Program benefits. ( a ) *Grounds for termination.* The Service may terminate benefits under the Family Unity Program whenever the necessity for the termination comes to the attention of the Service. Such grounds will exist in situations including, but not limited to, those in which: ( 1 ) A determination is made that Family Unity Program benefits were acquired as the result of fraud or willful misrepresentation of a material fact;
( 2 ) The beneficiary commits an act or acts which render him or her inadmissible as an immigrant ineligible for benefits under the Family Unity Program;
( 3 ) The legalized alien upon whose status benefits under the Family Unity Program were based loses his or her legalized status;
( 4 ) The beneficiary is the subject of a final order of exclusion, deportation, or removal issued subsequent to the grant of Family Unity benefits unless such final order is based on entry without inspection; violation of status; or failure to comply with section 265 of the Act; or inadmissibility at the time of entry other than inadmissibility pursuant to section 212(a)(2) or 212(a)(3) of the Act, regardless of whether the facts giving rise to such ground occurred before or after the benefits were granted; or
( 5 ) A qualifying relationship to a legalized alien no longer exists.
( b ) *Notice procedure.* Notice of intent to terminate and of the grounds thereof shall be served pursuant to the provisions of 8 CFR 103.8(a)(2). The alien shall be given 30 days to respond to the notice and may submit to the Service additional evidence in rebuttal. Any final decision of termination shall also be served pursuant to the provisions of 8 CFR 103.8(a)(2). Nothing in this section shall preclude the Service from commencing exclusion or deportation proceedings prior to termination of Family Unity Program benefits.
( c ) *Effect of termination.* Termination of benefits under the Family Unity Program, other than as a result of a final order of removal, shall render the alien amenable to removal proceedings under section 240 of the Act. If benefits are terminated, the period of voluntary departure under this section is also terminated.
[62 FR 10360, Mar. 6, 1997, as amended at 65 FR 43680, July 14, 2000; 76 FR 53791, Aug. 29, 2011]
Editorial Note on Part 635
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 635 appear at 67 FR 75924, Dec. 10, 2002.

§ 635.125 Termination of contract. ( a ) All contracts exceeding $10,000 shall contain suitable provisions for termination by the State, including the manner by which the termination will be effected and the basis for settlement. In addition, such contracts shall describe conditions under which the contract may be terminated for default as well as conditions where the contract may be terminated because of circumstances beyond the control of the contractor.
( b ) The State DOT prior to termination of a Federal-aid contract shall consult with and receive the concurrence of the Division Administrator. The extent of Federal-aid participation in contract termination costs, including final settlement, will depend upon the merits of the individual case. However, under no circumstances shall Federal funds participate in anticipated profit on work not performed.
( c ) Except as provided for in paragraph (e) of this section, normal Federal-aid plans, specifications, and estimates, advertising, and award procedures are to be followed when a State DOT awards the contract for completion of a terminated Federal-aid contract.
( d ) When a State DOT awards the contract for completion of a Federal-aid contract previously terminated for default, the construction amount eligible for Federal participation on the project should not exceed whichever amount is the lesser, either: ( 1 ) The amount representing the payments made under the original contract plus payments made under the new contract; or
( 2 ) The amount representing what the cost would have been if the construction had been completed as contemplated by the plans and specifications under the original contract.
( e ) If the surety awards a contract for completion of a defaulted Federal-aid contract or completes it by some other acceptable means, the FHWA will consider the terms of the original contract to be in effect and that the work will be completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications included therein. No further FHWA approval or concurrence action will therefore be needed in connection with any defaulted Federal-aid contract awarded by a surety. Under this procedure, the construction amount eligible for Federal participation on the project should not exceed the amount representing what the cost would have been if the construction had been completed as contemplated by the plans and specifications under the original contract.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted  from  the
unaudited financial statements for the period ended September 30, 2000 that were
filed  with the company's report on Form 10-QSB and is qualified in its entirety
by  reference  to  such  financial  statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                          JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           1
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 0
<PP&E>                                           0
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            0
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                         1
<OTHER-SE>                                      (1)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     0
<SALES>                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 0
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2)
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0


</TABLE>
### Geology and fluorspar deposits of the Levias-Keystone and Dike-Eaton areas, Crittenden County, Kentucky

By: Robert Denny Trace

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1122E

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf) 
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Superseded Publications:
                                        Preliminary notes on the geology of the Levias fault system, Crittenden County, Kentucky(1944)                                    

- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1241

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1241 appear at 68 FR 9846, Feb. 28, 2003, and 68 FR 10357, Mar. 5, 2003.

#### § 1241.15 Lack of jurisdiction to review other country of removal.

The immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals have no jurisdiction to review any determination by officers of the Department of Homeland Security under 8 CFR 241.15.

[70 FR 675, Jan. 5, 2005]
### §6412. Coral reef prize competitions

#### (a) In general

Subject to the availability of appropriations, the head of any Federal agency with a representative serving on the United States Coral Reef Task Force established by section 6451 of this title, may, individually or in cooperation with one or more agencies, carry out a program to award prizes competitively under section 3719 of title 15.

#### (b) Purposes

Any program carried out under this section shall be for the purpose of stimulating innovation to advance the ability of the United States to understand, research, or monitor coral reef ecosystems, or to develop management or adaptation options to preserve, sustain, and restore coral reef ecosystems.

#### (c) Priority programs

Priority shall be given to establishing programs under this section that address communities, environments, or industries that are in distress as a result of the decline or degradation of coral reef ecosystems, including—

(1) scientific research and monitoring that furthers the understanding of causes behind coral reef decline and degradation and the generally slow recovery following disturbances, including changing ocean chemistry, temperature-related bleaching, disease, and their associated impacts on coral physiology;

(2) the development of monitoring or management options for communities or industries that are experiencing significant financial hardship;

(3) the development of adaptation options to alleviate economic harm and job loss caused by damage to coral reef ecosystems;

(4) the development of measures to help vulnerable communities or industries, with an emphasis on rural communities and businesses; and

(5) the development of adaptation and management options for impacted tourism industries.

(Pub. L. 106–562, title II, §213, as added Pub. L. 117–263, div. J, title C, §10001(a), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3946.)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Release No. 97941 / July 18, 2023

ACCOUNTING AND AUDITING ENFORCEMENT

Release No. 4432 / July 18, 2023

Admin. Proc. File No. 3-17228

In the Matter of

MICHELLE L. HELTERBRAN COCHRAN,

CPA

ORDER REQUESTING RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

On April 26, 2016, the Commission instituted this administrative proceeding against

Michelle L. Helterbran Cochran, CPA.

1

 On June 2, 2023, the Commission determined to 

dismiss, as a matter of discretion, the proceeding.2 On June 20, 2023, Cochran sought 

reconsideration pursuant to Rule of Practice 470, which provides that “[n]o response to a motion 

for reconsideration shall be filed unless requested by the Commission.”3 Accordingly, IT IS 

ORDERED that the Division of Enforcement file a response to Cochran’s motion for 

reconsideration by July 25, 2023.

4

By the Commission.

Vanessa A. Countryman

Secretary

1 David Hall, P.C., Exchange Act Release No. 77718, 2016 WL 1665164 (Apr. 26, 2016).

2 Pending Administrative Proceedings, Exchange Act Release No. 97640, 2023 WL 

3790795 (June 2, 2023).

3

17 C.F.R. § 201.470(b).

4

See id. (providing that any response shall comply with Rule of Practice 154, 17 C.F.R. 

§ 201.154).
#### § 661.1 What is the purpose of this regulation?

The purpose of this regulation is to prescribe policies for project selection and fund allocation procedures for administering the Tribal Transportation Facility Bridge Program (TTFBP).
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Release No. 84063 / September 9, 2018

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) announced the temporary 

suspension, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange 

Act"), of trading in the securities Bitcoin Tracker One (“CXBTF”) and Ether Tracker One 

(“CETHF”) commencing at 5:30 p.m. EDT on September 9, 2018, and terminating at 11:59 p.m. 

EDT on September 20, 2018. 

The Commission temporarily suspended trading in the securities CXBTF and CETHF because of 

confusion amongst market participants regarding these instruments. This order was entered 

pursuant to Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act).

The Commission cautions broker-dealers, shareholders, and prospective purchasers that they 

should carefully consider the foregoing information along with all other currently available 

information and any information subsequently issued by the company. 

Further, brokers and dealers should be alert to the fact that, pursuant to Rule 15c2-11 under the 

Exchange Act, at the termination of the trading suspension, no quotation may be entered unless 

and until they have strictly complied with all of the provisions of the rule. If any broker or dealer 

has any questions as to whether or not he has complied with the rule, he should not enter any 

quotation but immediately contact the staff in the Division of Trading and Markets, Office of 

Interpretation and Guidance, at (202) 551-5777. If any broker or dealer is uncertain as to what is 

required by Rule 15c2-11, he should refrain from entering quotations relating CXBTF or CETHF

securities until such time as he has familiarized himself with the rule and is certain that all of its 

provisions have been met. If any broker or dealer enters any quotation which is in violation of 

the rule, the Commission will consider the need for prompt enforcement action.

If any broker, dealer, or other person has any information which may relate to this matter, they 

should immediately contact Reid Muoio, Esq., at muoior@sec.gov or (202) 551-4488.
### Geology of the Calamity Peak area, Custer County, South Dakota

By: Donald Harry Kupfer

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1142E

#### Links

- More information:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
§ 76.29 Witnesses. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, testimony at the hearing shall be given orally by witnesses under oath or affirmation.
( b ) At the discretion of the Judge and to the extent otherwise permitted by law, testimony may be admitted in the form of a written statement or deposition. Any such written statement must be provided to all other parties, along with the last known address of such witness, in a manner which allows sufficient time for other parties to subpoena, if necessary, such witness for cross-examination at the hearing. Prior written statements of witnesses proposed to testify at the hearing and deposition transcripts shall be exchanged as provided in 28 CFR 76.22.
( c ) The Judge shall exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to: ( 1 ) Make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth;
( 2 ) Avoid needless consumption of time; and
( 3 ) Protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
( d ) The Judge shall permit the parties to conduct such cross-examination as may be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts.
( e ) At the discretion of the Judge, a witness may be cross-examined on matters relevant to the proceeding without regard to the scope of his or her direct examination.
( f ) Upon motion of any party, the Judge shall order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses. This part does not authorize exclusion of the following: ( 1 ) The respondent;
( 2 ) An individual whose presence is shown by a party to be essential to the presentation of its case.
### Geology of the Eureka quadrangle, Utah and Juab Counties, Utah

By: H. T. Morris

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1142K

#### Links

- More information:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- Superseded Publications:
                                        Surficial deposits, geomorphology, and Cenozoic history of the Eureka quadrangle, Utah(1959)                                    

- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
(March 29, 1943.)

#### Herbert J. David, Respondent, v. Gus Goldstein et al., Appellants.

No opinion. Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur; Close, P. J., dissents and votes to modify the order of affirmance by inserting a provision reducing the judgment to one dollar and twenty-one cents, the amount concededly due for electricity used and, as so modified, to affirm the order, without costs, with the following memorandum: Plaintiff, as landlord, leased to defendants, as tenants, *689a furnished bungalow located at Lake Mohegan, a summer resort, for the summer season of 1941, the term to begin on July 3rd and to end on September 30th. The rent reserved was $350, to be paid in unequal installments up to August 1st. The record discloses that on October 5th plaintiff visited the premises and testified that he saw some cots and other belongings of defendants in the bungalow. On October 6th he caused a letter to be sent to defendant Cohen stating that, as the lease was terminated, he wanted the keys returned. The keys were not returned and the action was begun for $116.33 for the October rent as holdovers and for other items, including one dollar and twenty-one cents for electric current used. The judgment granted was for $117.54. The record contains no proof as to the rental value of the premises for the month of October, 1941. The amount allowed was apparently arrived .at by taking one third of the summer rental. However, as has been pointed out, that was not a monthly letting hut a seasonal letting. Aside from the failure of proof, I do not believe plaintiff has the right to recover on the theory that the tenants were holdovers. Assuming that they left some of their belongings in the premises, plaintiff had the option to treat them either as trespassers or holdovers. When he notified them that the lease had terminated, he elected to treat them as trespassers and not as holdovers. The equities of the situation are with appellants. It is well known that the summer rental of bungalows of this character is compensation for the entire year. It is the only income derived from the premises. *(Orville Realty Co., Inc.,*v. *Warnick,*113 Misc. 346.) This record fails to establish any intentional or wrongful holding over and the harsh rule invoked should not be countenanced under the facts here present. *(Smith*V. *Allt,*7 Daly, 492; *McCabe*v. *Evers,*9 N. Y. S. 541, not officially published; *Manly*v. *Clemmens,*14 N. Y. S. 366, not officially published.)