alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 361.510 How must the Memorandum of Understanding be negotiated? ( a ) WIOA emphasizes full and effective partnerships between Local WDBs, chief elected officials, and one-stop partners. Local WDBs and partners must enter into good-faith negotiations. Local WDBs, chief elected officials, and one-stop partners may also request assistance from a State agency responsible for administering the partner program, the Governor, State WDB, or other appropriate parties on other aspects of the MOU.
( b ) Local WDBs and one-stop partners must establish, in the MOU, how they will fund the infrastructure costs and other shared costs of the one-stop centers. If agreement regarding infrastructure costs is not reached when other sections of the MOU are ready, an interim infrastructure funding agreement may be included instead, as described in § 361.715(c). Once agreement on infrastructure funding is reached, the Local WDB and one-stop partners must amend the MOU to include the infrastructure funding of the one-stop centers. Infrastructure funding is described in detail in §§ 361.700 through 361.760.
( c ) The Local WDB must report to the State WDB, Governor, and relevant State agency when MOU negotiations with one-stop partners have reached an impasse. ( 1 ) The Local WDB and partners must document the negotiations and efforts that have taken place in the MOU. The State WDB, one-stop partner programs, and the Governor may consult with the appropriate Federal agencies to address impasse situations related to issues other than infrastructure funding after attempting to address the impasse. Impasses related to infrastructure cost funding must be resolved using the State infrastructure cost funding mechanism described in § 361.730.
( 2 ) The Local WDB must report failure to execute an MOU with a required partner to the Governor, State WDB, and the State agency responsible for administering the partner's program. Additionally, if the State cannot assist the Local WDB in resolving the impasse, the Governor or the State WDB must report the failure to the Secretary of Labor and to the head of any other Federal agency with responsibility for oversight of a partner's program.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Edward ELLERBE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-6213.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 18, 2002.

Decided May 3, 2002.

James Edward Ellerbe, Appellant Pro Se. John Samuel Bowler, Assistant United *92States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

James Edward Ellerbe appeals the district court’s orders denying his motion for a court order and denying reconsideration. Ellerbe’s motion relates to his conviction for aiding and abetting a conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribution of cocaine base in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2 (1994) and 21 U.S.C.A. §§ 841(a)(1), 846 (West 1999 & Supp.2001), which we affirmed on direct appeal. *See United States v. Ellerbe,*No. 98-4058, 1999 WL 64289 (4th Cir. Feb.11, 1999) (unpublished).

The proper basis to seek to invalidate a conviction is a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 *&*Supp.2001). Because Ellerbe has previously filed a motion seeking relief under § 2255, *see United States v. Ellerbe,*No. 00-7472, 2000 WL 1862099 (4th Cir. Dec.20, 2000) (unpublished), however, he must seek authorization from this Court under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244 (West 1994 & Supp.2001) prior to filing a successive motion under § 2255. Because Ellerbe has not sought this authorization, and counsel stated that Ellerbe had already received a complete copy of the documents he sought in the present motion, the district court properly denied his motion.

Accordingly, we deny Ellerbe’s several motions for appointment of counsel on appeal and affirm the orders of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
#### Anna Roughan, Appellant, v. Chenango Valley Savings Bank Respondent.

Sent to Fourth Department.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk June 28, 2010

d0621 

# Order

June 28, 2010

140778

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 140778 COA: 294883 Grand Traverse CC: TODD MICHAEL PORTER, 08-010693-FH Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 28, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
§ 303.20 Individualized family service plan. Individualized family service plan or IFSP means a written plan for providing early intervention services to an infant or toddler with a disability under this part and the infant's or toddler's family that— ( a ) Is based on the evaluation and assessment described in § 303.321;
( b ) Includes the content specified in § 303.344;
( c ) Is implemented as soon as possible once parental consent for the early intervention services in the IFSP is obtained (consistent with § 303.420); and
( d ) Is developed in accordance with the IFSP procedures in §§ 303.342, 303.343, and 303.345.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1401(15), 1435(a)(4), 1436)
November 30, 2015

Jeffrey D. Kyle, Clerk 

Third District of Texas 

P.O. Box 12547

Austin, Texas 78711-2547

512-463-1733

RE: COA No. 03-15-00302-CR

Trial Court Cause No. D-1-DC-13-900252

George DeLaCruz v. State of Texas

Dear Mr. Kyle,

This is my fourth request for extension in the above-entitled cause, and I would respectfully 

request a final 30-day extension. I have been on a 30-day leave in order to enable me to

focus solely on my outstanding appellate records. I have filed one five volume record with the 

First Court of Appeals, One five volume record with the Third Court of Appeals and one small 

three volume record with the Third Court of Appeals in the last three weeks. I currently have

the above-entitled cause on appeal, which is extremely voluminous. It is approximately 35 

Volumes long. I also have the records COA No. 03-15-000424-CR, COA No. 03-15-00066, COA

No. 03-15-00306 all which are due on the exact same date. Due to the circumstances, I would

respectfully request until December 30, 2015.

Thank you for your time, patience, and attention to this matter. If you have any questions, 

please feel free to call me at 512-854-9315 or by email at Kimberly.lee@traviscountytx.gov.

Sincerely, 

Kimberly Lee

Official Court Reporter

147th District Court

Travis County, Texas

512-854-9315
**EXHIBIT
31.1**
 
 **CERTIFICATION**
 
 I, Michael
D. Keough, certify that:
 
 1.
    I
      have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Q Comm International,
      Inc.;
 
 2.
    Based
      on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
      material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
      statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
      were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
      report;
 
 3.
    Based
      on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
      included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
      financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
      registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4.
    The
      registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for
      establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
      defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant
      and have:
 
 a)
    Designed
      such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
      controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
      that material information relating to the registrant, including its
      consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
      entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
      prepared; and
 
 b)
    Evaluated
      the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures
      and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
      the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period
      covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and
 
 c)
    Disclosed
      in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
      fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
      annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
      materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
      reporting; and
 
 5.
    The
      registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
      our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
      to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's
      board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 a)
    All
      significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
      operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
      reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
      process, summarize and report financial information;
and
 
 b)
    Any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
      employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
      over financial reporting.
 
 Date: June
      2, 2005
    /s/
      Michael D. KeoughMichael
      D. KeoughChief
      Executive Officer
### §1595. Civil remedy

(a) An individual who is a victim of a violation of this chapter may bring a civil action against the perpetrator (or whoever knowingly benefits, or attempts or conspires to benefit, financially or by receiving anything of value from participation in a venture which that person knew or should have known has engaged in an act in violation of this chapter) in an appropriate district court of the United States and may recover damages and reasonable attorneys fees.

(b)(1) Any civil action filed under subsection (a) shall be stayed during the pendency of any criminal action arising out of the same occurrence in which the claimant is the victim.

(2) In this subsection, a "criminal action" includes investigation and prosecution and is pending until final adjudication in the trial court.

(c) No action may be maintained under subsection (a) unless it is commenced not later than the later of—

(1) 10 years after the cause of action arose; or

(2) 10 years after the victim reaches 18 years of age, if the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged offense.

(d) In any case in which the attorney general of a State has reason to believe that an interest of the residents of that State has been or is threatened or adversely affected by any person who violates section 1591, the attorney general of the State, as parens patriae, may bring a civil action against such person on behalf of the residents of the State in an appropriate district court of the United States to obtain appropriate relief.

(Added Pub. L. 108–193, §4(a)(4)(A), Dec. 19, 2003, 117 Stat. 2878; amended Pub. L. 110–457, title II, §221(2), Dec. 23, 2008, 122 Stat. 5067; Pub. L. 114–22, title I, §120, May 29, 2015, 129 Stat. 247; Pub. L. 115–164, §6, Apr. 11, 2018, 132 Stat. 1255; Pub. L. 117–347, title I, §102, Jan. 5, 2023, 136 Stat. 6200.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2023—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 117–347 inserted "or attempts or conspires to benefit," after "whoever knowingly benefits,".

2018—Subsecs. (b)(1), (c). Pub. L. 115–164, §6(b), substituted "subsection (a)" for "this section".

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 115–164, §6(a), added subsec. (d).

2015—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 114–22 substituted "not later than the later of—" for "not later than 10 years after the cause of action arose." and added pars. (1) and (2).

2008—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–457, §221(2)(A), struck out "of section 1589, 1590, or 1591" after "victim of a violation" and inserted "(or whoever knowingly benefits, financially or by receiving anything of value from participation in a venture which that person knew or should have known has engaged in an act in violation of this chapter)" after "perpetrator".

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 110–457, §221(2)(B), added subsec. (c).
§ 106.55 Job classification and structure. A recipient shall not: ( a ) Classify a job as being for males or for females;
( b ) Maintain or establish separate lines of progression, seniority lists, career ladders, or tenure systems based on sex; or
( c ) Maintain or establish separate lines of progression, seniority systems, career ladders, or tenure systems for similar jobs, position descriptions, or job requirements which classify persons on the basis of sex, unless sex is a bona-fide occupational qualification for the positions in question as set forth in § 106.61.
[45 FR 30955, May 9, 1980, as amended at 85 FR 30579, May 19, 2020]
# C_2017052EN.01000301.xml

| 18.2.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.2.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52/3

---

Notice for the attention of the data subjects to whom the restrictive measures provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 concerning certain restrictive measures in respect of Zimbabwe apply

(2017/C 52/03)

The attention of data subjects is drawn to the following information in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1):

1

The legal basis for this processing operation is Council Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 of 19 February 2004, concerning certain restrictive measures in respect of Zimbabwe (2).

2

The controller of this processing operation is the Council of the European Union represented by the Director General of DG C (Foreign Affairs, Enlargement, Civil Protection) of the General Secretariat of the Council and the department entrusted with the processing operation is the Unit 1C of DG C that can be contacted at:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG C 1C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG C 1C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Email: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

The purpose of the processing operation is the establishment and updating of the list of persons subject to restrictive measures in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 314/2004.

The data subjects are the natural persons who fulfil listing criteria as laid down in that Regulation.

The personal data collected includes data necessary for the correct identification of the person concerned, the Statement of Reasons and any other data related thereto.

The personal data collected may be shared as necessary with the European External Action Service and the Commission.

Without prejudice to restrictions provided for in Article 20(1)(a) and (d) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, requests for access, as well as requests for rectification or objection will be answered in accordance with section 5 of Council Decision 2004/644/EC (3).

3

Personal data will be retained for 5 years from the moment the data subject has been removed from the list of persons subject to the asset freeze or the validity of the measure has expired, or for the duration of court proceedings in the event they had been started.

Data subjects may have recourse to the European Data Protection Supervisor in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001.

---

(1)  OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ L 55, 24.2.2004, p. 1.

2

(3)  OJ L 296, 21.9.2004, p. 16.

3

---
§ 300.26 Institution of higher education. *Institution of higher education* — ( a ) Has the meaning given the term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended, 20 U.S.C. 1021 *et seq.* (HEA); and
( b ) Also includes any community college receiving funds from the Secretary of the Interior under the Tribally Controlled Community College or University Assistance Act of 1978, 25 U.S.C. 1801, *et seq.*
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1401(17))
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. John E. Korndahl, Appellant.

- Judgment affirmed. No opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
### §6606. Authorization of appropriations

#### (a) In general

There is authorized to be appropriated to the Fund $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 2023.

#### (b) Allocation

Of the amounts made available for each fiscal year pursuant to subsection (a)—

(1) not less than $1,510,000 shall be used by the Secretary for marine turtle conservation purposes in accordance with this chapter; and

(2) of the amounts in excess of the amount described in paragraph (1), not less than 40 percent shall be used by the Secretary for freshwater turtle and tortoise conservation purposes in accordance with this chapter.

(Pub. L. 108–266, §7, July 2, 2004, 118 Stat. 795; Pub. L. 116–9, title VII, §7001(c)(3)(F), Mar. 12, 2019, 133 Stat. 788.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2019—Pub. L. 116–9 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "There is authorized to be appropriated to the Fund $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009."
§ 381.5 What definitions apply? ( a ) Definitions in EDGAR at 34 CFR part 77.
( b ) Definitions in 2 CFR part 200 subpart A.
( c ) *Other definitions.* The following definitions also apply to this part:
*Act* means the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended.
*Advocacy* means pleading an individual's cause or speaking or writing in support of an individual. Advocacy may be formal, as in the case of a lawyer representing an individual in a court of law or in formal administrative proceedings before government agencies (whether tribal, State, local, or Federal). Advocacy also may be informal, as in the case of a lawyer or non-lawyer representing an individual in negotiations, mediation, or informal administrative proceedings before government agencies (whether tribal, State, local, or Federal), or as in the case of a lawyer or non-lawyer representing an individual's cause before private entities or organizations, or government agencies (whether tribal, State, local, or Federal). Advocacy may be on behalf of— ( i ) A single individual, in which case it is individual advocacy;
( ii ) More than one individual or a group or class of individuals, in which case it is systems (or systemic) advocacy; or
( iii ) Oneself, in which case it is self advocacy.
*Eligible individual with a disability* means an individual who— ( i ) Needs protection and advocacy services that are beyond the scope of services authorized to be provided by the CAP under section 112 of the Act; and
( ii ) Is ineligible for— ( A ) Protection and advocacy programs under part C of the DD Act; and
( B ) Protection and advocacy programs under the PAIMI.
*Eligible system* means a protection and advocacy system that is established under part C of the DD Act and that meets the requirements of § 381.10.
*Mediation* means the act or process of using an independent third party to act as a mediator, intermediary, or conciliator to settle differences or disputes between persons or parties. The third party who acts as a mediator, intermediary, or conciliator must not be any entity or individual who is connected in any way with the eligible system or the agency, entity, or individual with whom the individual with a disability has a dispute. Mediation may involve the use of professional mediators or any other independent third party mutually agreed to by the parties to the dispute.
*State* means, in addition to each of the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, except for purposes of sections 509(c)(3)(B) and (c)(4) of the Act, in which case State does not mean or include Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
(Authority: Sections 7(34), 12(c), and 509 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; 29 U.S.C. 705(34), 709(c) and 794e)
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 716

 712

 754

 739

 740

 719

 720

 558

 557

 558

 614

 707

 688

 634

 625

 634

 673

 706

 728

 728

 723

 690

 699

 728

 733

 730

 754

 762

 762

 755

 676

 645

 696

 697

 702

 701

 523

 524

 540

 543

 555

 611

 636

 623

 623

 624

 634

 666

 684

 699

 692

 680

 689

 695

 723

 720

 726

 752

 757

 746

 697

 668

 724

 725

 715

 711

 622

 541

 547

 548

 568

 681

 660

 629

 624

 627

 647

 683

 705

 720

 706

 685

 692

 712

 730

 723

 741

 758

 761

 750

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2006 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: May 2, 2006

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

TDS

 447

 429

 463

 464

 458

 455

 400

 350

 354

 355

 367

 437

 424

 405

 402

 403

 416

 438

 452

 461

 452

 439

 444

 456

 467

 463

 474

 484

 486

 480

TOTAL 20,300

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 20
SAMMY LEE GIBBS

A/K/A SAMMY L. GIBBS

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO

. 1D 16

- 5330

_____________________________/

Opinion filed May 16, 2017.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Calhoun County

. Shonna Young Gay , Judge

.

Sammy Lee Gibbs a/k/a Sammy L. Gibbs , pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney Genera l, and Donna A. Gerace, Assistant Attorney

General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. This Court retains jurisdiction to address the imposition of

sanctions.

WOLF, RAY, and BILBREY, J J

. , CONCUR.