alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 363.51 What are the allowable administrative costs? ( a ) A State may use funds under this part to pay for expenditures incurred in the administration of activities carried out under this part, consistent with the definition of administrative costs in 34 CFR 361.5(c)(2).
( b ) A designated State agency may not expend more than 2.5 percent of a State's allotment under this part for administrative costs for carrying out the State supported employment program.
(Authority: Sections 7(1), 12(c), and 603(c) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; 29 U.S.C. 705(1), 709(c), and 795h(c))
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THESE SCHEDULES HAVE BEEN RESTATED TO CONFORM WITH EITF 97-2, AS SUCH, REVENUES
AND EXPENSES OF NON-OWNED MANAGED HOTELS ARE NO LONGER INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

EPS HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SFAS NO. 128, AND BASIC AND DILUTED EPS
HAVE BEEN ENTERED IN THE PRIMARY AND FULLY DILUTED LINE ITEMS, RESPECTIVELY.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<CIK> 0000048595
<NAME> STARWOOD HOTELS & RESORTS
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. 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>                                              36
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,047
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   326
<PP&E>                                           4,676
<DEPRECIATION>                                     207
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,569
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              418
<BONDS>                                            592
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              170
<PREFERRED>                                          5
<COMMON>                                             2
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,348
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,569
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    82
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       18
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   3
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     61
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 61
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        61
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.35
        

</TABLE>
§ 21.53 Final decision of the CRRA. ( a ) In an application subject to the jurisdiction of the CRRA, the CRRA shall, within 30 days after receipt of the written appeal— ( 1 ) Issue a final decision on the appeal of the adjudicative officer's initial decision; or
( 2 ) Remand the application to the adjudicative officer for further proceedings.
( b ) The CRRA shall review the initial decision on the basis of the written record of the proceedings on the application. This includes but is not limited to— ( 1 ) The written request; and
( 2 ) The adjudicative officer's findings as described in § 21.51(b).
( c ) The CRRA shall act on the review by either— ( 1 ) Issuing a final decision on the application; or
( 2 ) Remanding the application to the adjudicative officer for further proceedings.
( d ) If the CRRA issues a final decision, the CRRA's decision must include— ( 1 ) Written findings, including supporting explanation, on— ( i ) The applicant's status as a prevailing party;
( ii ) The applicant's eligibility;
( iii ) Whether the position of the Department was substantially justified;
( iv ) Whether special circumstances make an award unjust;
( v ) Whether the applicant engaged in conduct that unduly or unreasonably protracted the adversary adjudication; and
( vi ) Other factual issues raised in the adversary adjudication.
( 2 ) A statement of the amount awarded, including an explanation—with supporting information—for any difference between the amount requested by the applicant and the amount awarded.
( 3 ) A statement of the applicant's right to request review by the Secretary under § 21.54.
( 4 ) A statement of the applicant's right under § 21.56 to seek judicial review of the final award determination.
( e ) The explanation referred to in paragraph (d)(2) of this section may include— ( 1 ) Whether the amount requested was reasonable; and
( 2 ) The extent to which the applicant unduly or unreasonably protracted the adversary adjudication.
(Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301, 557 (b) and (c); 20 U.S.C. 1681 and 3401 *et seq.;* 29 U.S.C. 794; 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1 *et seq.* and 6101 *et seq.*)
### §581a–1. Repealed. Pub. L. 95–307, §4(d), June 30, 1978, 92 Stat. 355

Section, act Aug. 31, 1951, ch. 374, title I, §101, 65 Stat. 233, authorized receipt of funds on or after Aug. 31, 1951, from States, etc., for establishment or operation of forest research facilities.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective Oct. 1, 1978, see section 9 of Pub. L. 95–307, set out as an Effective Date note under section 1641 of this title.
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




The
undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
SINOCUBATE, INC.




/s/
      Tom Simeo
                
                Date:
      May 14, 2009Tom
      Simeo
                  Chief
      Executive Officer, Treasurer
                  Director
      and Secretary
### §2076. Clerk of United States District Court

Whoever, being a clerk of a district court of the United States, willfully refuses or neglects to make or forward any report, certificate, statement, or document as required by law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 796; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, §601(a)(11), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3498.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on section 522 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Judicial Code and Judiciary (Feb. 22, 1875, ch. 95, §6, 18 Stat. 334).

The reference to the offense as a misdemeanor was omitted as unnecessary in view of the definition of "misdemeanor" in section 1 of this title.

The last sentence providing that conviction should not be a condition precedent to removal from office was omitted as unnecessary.

Minor changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1996—Pub. L. 104–294 substituted "fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both" for "fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year" before period at end.
#### § 106.61 Sex as a bona-fide occupational qualification.

A recipient may take action otherwise prohibited by this subpart provided it is shown that sex is a bona-fide occupational qualification for that action, such that consideration of sex with regard to such action is essential to successful operation of the employment function concerned. A recipient shall not take action pursuant to this section which is based upon alleged comparative employment characteristics or stereotyped characterizations of one or the other sex, or upon preference based on sex of the recipient, employees, students, or other persons, but nothing contained in this section shall prevent a recipient from considering an employee's sex in relation to employment in a locker room or toilet facility used only by members of one sex.

[45 FR 30955, May 9, 1980, as amended at 85 FR 30579, May 19, 2020]
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

Richmond Division 

IN RE: 

STEPHEN MAURICE BANKS 

Debtor 

Chapter 13 

Case No. 17-35699-KRH 

U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A., AS TRUSTEE 

FOR LSF9 MASTER PARTICIPATION 

TRUST 

Movant 

v. 

STEPHEN MAURICE BANKS 

(Debtor) 

SUZANNE E. WADE 

(Trustee) 

Respondents 

Ref. Dkt. #35, 37 

NOTICE OF FAILURE TO CURE AND TERMINATION OF THE AUTOMATIC STAY 

 COMES NOW, U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for LSF9 Master Participation Trust 

(“Caliber”) by undersigned counsel hereby gives notice of the following: 

1. That a Consent Order Modifying Automatic Stay and Granting Relief from CoDebtor Stay (“Consent Order”) was entered by this Court on August 6, 2018. 

2. Caliber has complied with the terms of the terms of the entered Consent Order. 

3. The Debtor failed to comply with the terms of the entered Consent Order. 

4. That pursuant to the terms of the Consent Order, a Notice of Default was served 

and filed on August 29, 2018. 

Case 17-35699-KRH Doc 38 Filed 09/27/18 Entered 09/27/18 15:31:44 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 3
5. That neither the Debtor nor the Trustee has complied with the terms of the 

Consent Order by failing to take any of the following actions: 

a. cure the default; 

b. file an objection with the Court stating that no default exists; or 

c. file an objection with the Court stating any other reason why an Order 

granting relief from the automatic stay should not be entered; and 

6. That pursuant to the terms of the Consent Order, Caliber considers the automatic 

stay terminated with regards to the collateral referenced in the Consent Order 

upon entry of the Order Terminating Stay. 

Date: _September 27, 2018__________ 

Respectfully submitted, 

 /s/ Kathryn Smits 

Kathryn Smits, Bar #77337 

Namrata Loomba, Bar #87222 

Orlans PC 

PO Box 2548 

Leesburg, VA 20177 

(703)777-7101 

Attorneys for U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as Trustee for 

LSF9 Master Participation Trust 

ksmits@orlans.com 

nloomba@orlans.com 

Case 17-35699-KRH Doc 38 Filed 09/27/18 Entered 09/27/18 15:31:44 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned states that on September 27, 2018, copies of the foregoing Notice of 

Failure to Cure and Termination of the Automatic Stay were filed with the Clerk of the Court 

using the ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to the following: 

Suzanne E. Wade 

P.O. Box 1780 

Richmond, VA 23218-1780 

Bankruptcy Trustee 

Deanna H. Hathaway 

Hathaway Adair, PC 

710 N. Hamilton Street 

Suite 200 

Richmond, VA 23221 

ecf@hathawayadair.com 

Debtor’s Attorney 

and I hereby certify that I have caused to be mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid, copies of 

the foregoing Notice of Failure to Cure and Termination of the Automatic Stay to the following 

non-ECF participants: 

Stephen Maurice Banks 

13300 Shore Lake Turn 

Chesterfield, VA 23838 

Debtor 

 /s/ Kathryn Smits 

Kathryn Smits, Esquire 

Namrata Loomba, Esquire 

Case 17-35699-KRH Doc 38 Filed 09/27/18 Entered 09/27/18 15:31:44 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 99.2



CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



This Certificate is being filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This Certification is included solely for the purposes of complying with
the provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and is not intended to be used for any other purpose. In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Compass Knowledge Holdings, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31,
2003, each of the undersigned hereby certifies in his capacity as an officer of Super Vision International, Inc that to the best of the undersigneds knowledge:



1. Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Compass Knowledge Holdings, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



2. The information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Compass Knowledge Holdings, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2003, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Compass Knowledge Holdings, Inc.



|                    |  |  |  | Compass Knowledge Holdings, Inc.
|------------------- |  |  |  | --------------------------------
|                   
|Dated: May 15, 2003 |  |  |  |                                 
|                    |  |  |  |
#### § 101.32 Signature of documents.

The signature of a party, authorized officer, employee or attorney constitutes a certificate that he has read the document, that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it, and that it is not interposed for delay. If a document is not signed or is signed with intent to defeat the purpose of this section, it may be stricken as sham and false and the proceeding may proceed as though the document had not been filed. Similar action may be taken if scandalous or indecent matter is inserted.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 31, 2017

No. 04-16-00576-CR, 04-16-00577-CR & 04-16-00578-CR

Kathleen Darleen DANIEL,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 216th Judicial District Court, Kendall County, Texas

Trial Court No. 5924, 5925 & 5926

Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The State’s brief was originally due on June 2, 2017. The Kendall County Criminal 

District Attorney has been granted two previous extensions of time in which to file the brief, the 

latest until August 2, 2017. On July 25, 2017, the District Attorney filed a third request for an 

extension. 

The motion is GRANTED, and the Kendall County Criminal District Attorney is hereby 

ORDERED to file appellee’s brief no later than September 1, 2017. NO FURTHER 

EXTENSIONS WILL BE GRANTED ABSENT EXTENTUATING CIRCUMSTANCES.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 31st day of July, 2017.

___________________________________

Luz Estrada

Chief Deputy Clerk
# Official Journal C 391/2018

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 391 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6129 October 2018 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 391

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6129 October 2018

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 391/01 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2018/C 391/02 | Special Report No 24/2018 — ‘Demonstrating carbon capture and storage and innovative renewables at commercial scale in the EU: intended progress not achieved in the past decade’ | 2 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2018/C 391/01

Euro exchange rates

1

Court of Auditors

2018/C 391/02

Special Report No 24/2018 — ‘Demonstrating carbon capture and storage and innovative renewables at commercial scale in the EU: intended progress not achieved in the past decade’

2

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 391/03 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8864 — Vodafone/Certain Liberty Global Assets) (
  1
  ) | 3 |
| 2018/C 391/04 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9088 — Fricke Holding/Jungheinrich/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 5 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2018/C 391/03

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.8864 — Vodafone/Certain Liberty Global Assets) (
  1
  )

1

3

2018/C 391/04

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.9088 — Fricke Holding/Jungheinrich/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

5

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
§ 463.1 What is the purpose of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act? The purpose of the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) is to create a partnership among the Federal Government, States, and localities to provide, on a voluntary basis, adult education and literacy activities, in order to— ( a ) Assist adults to become literate and obtain the knowledge and skills necessary for employment and economic self-sufficiency;
( b ) Assist adults who are parents or family members to obtain the education and skills that— ( 1 ) Are necessary to becoming full partners in the educational development of their children; and
( 2 ) Lead to sustainable improvements in the economic opportunities for their family;
( c ) Assist adults in attaining a secondary school diploma or its recognized equivalent and in the transition to postsecondary education and training, through career pathways; and
( d ) Assist immigrants and other individuals who are English language learners in— ( 1 ) Improving their— ( i ) Reading, writing, speaking, and comprehension skills in English; and
( ii ) Mathematics skills; and
( 2 ) Acquiring an understanding of the American system of Government, individual freedom, and the responsibilities of citizenship.
(Authority: 29 U.S.C. 3271)
June 16, 1999

VIA FACSIMILE AND FIRST CLASS MAIL
(561) 684-4986

Rick Crawford
Financial Fitness Centers Trust
1711 Worthington Road, Suite 103
West Palm Beach, Florida  33409-6407

Re:  GolfGear International, Inc.
     Subscription of Common Stock

Dear Rick:

This letter, when signed by you on behalf of Bidwell Trust
("Bidwell"), shall constitute a binding agreement to purchase up
to one million shares of GolfGear International, Inc.  (the
"Company") common stock, restricted under Rule 144.  The terms
and conditions of this agreement are as follows:

1.  Bidwell shall be given an option to purchase the first
500,000 shares at $0.75 cents per share.  This option shall
expire on August 31, 1999.  Upon timely purchase of all of the
shares at $0.75 per share, Bidwell shall be given an option to
purchase an additional 500,000 shares at $1.00 per share.  This
option shall expire on October 31, 1999.  In the event that
Bidwell has purchased at least 50% of the shares at $1.00 per
share on or before October 31, 1999, this option shall
automatically be extended and expire on November 30, 1999.  For
each share that is purchased, the Company will issue one warrant
exercisable at the same purchase price as the shares purchased
and said warrant shall expire five years from date of issuance.

2.  This agreement is subject to the Company's receipt of
$50,000 via wire transfer by Wednesday, June 16, 1999.  The
Company agrees to provide Bidwell monthly financial reports
(unaudited) and operating projections.

3.  The Company shall pay to Financial Fitness Centers Trust
(AFFCT@) a finder's fee for all qualified investors who are
introduced to the Company as a result of its efforts and who
purchase Series A Convertible  Preferred Shares as more fully
described in the Company's Private Placement Memorandum dated
June 15,1999 ("PPM") or on any terms and conditions otherwise
acceptable to the Company.  This fee shall be the amount of 10%
plus 2% for expenses, all due and payable upon funding.

A bonus in the form of warrants equivalent to 20% of the amount
of funds received for all shares of Series A Convertible
Preferred Shares sold will be paid to FFCT. The warrants shall
have a strike price of 110% of the purchase price.

If the above meets with your approval, please sign where
indicated below.  The only other documentation that you will
receive will be a formal subscription agreement.

Sincerely,


Gary C.  Wykidal
On behalf of GolfGear International Inc.

AGREED AND ACCEPTED:

DATED:  June 16, 1999           BIDWELL TRUST


                                BY: /s/___________________________
                                            AUTHORIZED AGENT

DATED:  June 16, 1999           FINANCIAL FITNESS CENTERS TRUST


                                BY: /s/__________________________
                                           AUTHORIZED AGENT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

TERRANCE PORTER, )

)

 Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-4156

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

 Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed May 11, 2018. 

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for 

Pinellas County; Frank Quesada, Judge.

Terrance Porter, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

SILBERMAN, CRENSHAW, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
§ 300.202 Use of amounts. ( a ) *General.* Amounts provided to the LEA under Part B of the Act— ( 1 ) Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part;
( 2 ) Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section; and
( 3 ) Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds.
( b ) *Excess cost requirement* — ( 1 ) *General.* ( i ) The excess cost requirement prevents an LEA from using funds provided under Part B of the Act to pay for all of the costs directly attributable to the education of a child with a disability, subject to paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section.
( ii ) The excess cost requirement does not prevent an LEA from using Part B funds to pay for all of the costs directly attributable to the education of a child with a disability in any of the ages 3, 4, 5, 18, 19, 20, or 21, if no local or State funds are available for nondisabled children of these ages. However, the LEA must comply with the nonsupplanting and other requirements of this part in providing the education and services for these children.
( 2 ) ( i ) An LEA meets the excess cost requirement if it has spent at least a minimum average amount for the education of its children with disabilities before funds under Part B of the Act are used.
( ii ) The amount described in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section is determined in accordance with the definition of *excess costs* in § 300.16. That amount may not include capital outlay or debt service.
( 3 ) If two or more LEAs jointly establish eligibility in accordance with § 300.223, the minimum average amount is the average of the combined minimum average amounts determined in accordance with the definition of excess costs in § 300.16 in those agencies for elementary or secondary school students, as the case may be.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1820-0600) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1413(a)(2)(A))
§ 636.408 Can communications be used to cure proposal deficiencies? ( a ) No, communications must not be used to: ( 1 ) Cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions;
( 2 ) Materially alter the technical or cost elements of the proposal; and/or
( 3 ) Otherwise revise the proposal.
( b ) Communications may be considered in rating proposals for the purpose of establishing the competitive range.