alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeAbout NRCGrant OpportunitiesGrant Awards

# Grant Awards - 2011

On this page:
        - FY11 Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) Financial Assistance Program Awards
        - FY11 Minority Serving Institutions Grant Program Awards
        - Success Stories

*This page includes links to files in non-HTML format. See Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools for more information.*

## FY11 Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) Financial Assistance Program Awards

## FY11 Minority Serving Institutions Grant Program Awards

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, March 20, 2020

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - 2024 FOA Awards
          - 2023 FOA Awards
          - 2022 FOA Awards
          - 2021 FOA Awards
          - 2020 FOA Awards
          - 2019
          - 2018
          - 2017
          - 2016
          - 2009
          - 2010
          - 2011
          - 2012
          - 2013
          - 2014
          - 2015
          - Success Stories

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, March 20, 2020
#### § 147.665 State.

*State* means any of the States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any territory or possession of the United States.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from
     BONITO INDUSTRIES, INC.  June 30, 1997  financial  statements and
     is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                         0000894530
<NAME>                        BONITO INDUSTRIES, INC.

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997

<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997

<CASH>                                                   0
<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>                                             1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                          (1,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             0
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          0
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                             0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        


</TABLE>
#### § 312.4 Purpose and scope of the Regional Innovation Strategies Program.

Under the RIS Program, EDA makes grants on a competitive basis to eligible applicants to foster connected, innovation-centric economic regions that support commercialization and entrepreneurship. The grants are intended to build public and private capacity to invent and improve products and services and to bring those products and services to market through a process often referred to as technology commercialization, as demonstrated by methodologically sound metrics for output and outcome.
### §860A. Taxation of REMIC's

#### (a) General rule

Except as otherwise provided in this part, a REMIC shall not be subject to taxation under this subtitle (and shall not be treated as a corporation, partnership, or trust for purposes of this subtitle).

#### (b) Income taxable to holders

The income of any REMIC shall be taxable to the holders of interests in such REMIC as provided in this part.

(Added Pub. L. 99–514, title VI, §671(a), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2309; amended Pub. L. 100–647, title I, §1006(t)(20), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3426.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1988—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 100–647 substituted "this subtitle" for "this chapter" in two places.

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

#### Effective Date of 1988 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–647 effective, except as otherwise provided, as if included in the provision of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99–514, to which such amendment relates, see section 1019(a) of Pub. L. 100–647, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 99–514, title VI, §675(a)–(c), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2320, as amended by Pub. L. 100–647, title I, §1006(w)(1), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3427, provided that:

"(a) General Rule.—Except as otherwise provided in this section, the amendments made by this subtitle [subtitle H (§§671–675) of title VI of Pub. L. 99–514, enacting this part and amending sections 582, 593, 856, 1272, 6049, and 7701 of this title] shall take effect on January 1, 1987.

"(b) Rules for Accruing Original Issue Discount.—The amendment made by section 672 [amending section 1272 of this title] shall apply to debt instruments issued after December 31, 1986, in taxable years ending after such date.

"(c) Treatment of Taxable Mortgage Pools.—

"(1) In general.—The amendment made by section 673 [amending section 7701 of this title] shall take effect on January 1, 1992.

"(2) Treatment of existing entities.—The amendment made by section 673 shall not apply to any entity in existence on December 31, 1991. The preceding sentence shall cease to apply with respect to any entity as of the 1st day after December 31, 1991, on which there is a substantial transfer of cash or other property to such entity.

"(3) Special rule for coordination with wash-sale rules.—Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (2), for purposes of applying section 860F(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by this part [this subtitle]), the amendment made by section 673 shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1986."

#### Study of Amendments by Pub. L. 99–514

Pub. L. 99–514, title VI, §675(d), as added by Pub. L. 100–647, title I, §1006(w)(2), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3427, directed Secretary of the Treasury to conduct a study of the operation of the amendments made by this part [this subtitle] and their competitive impact on savings and loan institutions and similar financial institutions and, not later than Jan. 1, 1990, report to Congress, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 101–508, title XI, §11832(5), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–559.
**Exhibit
      31.1**




SECTION
      302 CERTIFICATION




I,
      William Ardrey certify that:




1.
      I have
      reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Avantogen Oncology, Inc.;




2.
      Based
      on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a 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 officers 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 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;




b)
      evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
      procedures as the end of the period covered by this report; and




c)
      presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
      disclosure controls and procedures, based on our evaluation as of the end of
      the
      period covered by this report.




Date:
                October 26, 2007By:
            /s/
                William ArdreyWilliam
                Ardrey
                Chief
                  Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-2466

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JOHN ERIC HUGHES,

Claimant - Appellant,

and

PARCEL A-4 OF PALMER SPRINGS DISTRICT,

MECKLENBURG COUNTY, VIRGINIA, CONTAINING 3.5

ACRES, MORE OR LESS, TITLED TO JOHN ERIC

HUGHES, ALSO INCLUDING THE LIFE ESTATE OF MARY

ELIZABETH C. HUGHES, All right, title and

interest in the real property, including all

structures and improvements thereon, designated as; $1,600 IN U. S. CURRENCY,

Defendants,

ARETHA HUGHES; MARY ELIZABETH C. HUGHES,

Claimants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. James R. Spencer, District Judge.

(CA-00-107-3)

Submitted: April 20, 2001 Decided: May 25, 2001
2

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Eric Hughes, Appellant Pro Se. Gurney Wingate Grant, II,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

John Eric Hughes appeals the district court’s order granting

summary judgment to the Government in its forfeiture action. We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. See United States v. Hughes, No. CA-00-107-3 (E.D.

Va. Oct. 23, 2000). 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
Exhibit 10.19


 





Amendment to Rush Street Interactive,
Inc.

Omnibus 2020 Equity Incentive Plan


 


This Amendment to the Rush Street Interactive,
Inc. Omnibus Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby adopted this 24th day of March, 2021, by Rush Street
Interactive, Inc. (the “Company”).


 


Pursuant to a resolution of the Board of
Directors of the Company, in accordance with Section 15 of the Plan, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:


 


		1.	By deleting the words “December 29, 2020” in Section 18 with respect to the term of
the Plan and replacing it with “the date that is ten (10) years from the Effective Date” to correct a scrivener’s
error in the document and to correctly state that the Plan’s termination date is December 29, 2030, ten years after the date
the Plan was originally adopted.



		2.	Except as specifically set forth herein, the terms of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect
as prior to this Amendment.



 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company
has caused this amendment to be executed by its duly authorized officer as of the date first above written.


 


	Rush
    Street Interactive, Inc.	 
	 	 
	By: 	/s/ Kyle Sauers	 
	Name:  	Kyle Sauers	 
	Title:	Chief Financial Officer
GEORGE LYONS

,

Petitioner,

v.

MICHAEL D. CREWS, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

,
Respondent. ___________________________/ 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 14

- 0382

Opinion filed October 6, 2014.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari

-- Original Jurisdiction

.
George Lyons, pro se , Petitioner.

Jennifer Parker, General Counsel, and Beverly Brewster, Ass istant General Counsel, Florida Department of Corrections, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits

.

LEWIS, C.J., THOMAS and OSTERHAUS , JJ.

, CONCUR.
Exhibit 23.3
 
 
 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 
 
 We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of China Digital Communication Group (File No. 333-162701) of our report dated March 28, 2011 with respect to our audit of the consolidated financial statements of New Energy Systems Group (Formerly known as China Digital Communication Group) as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and for the year then ended, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A No.4 of New Energy Systems Group for the year ended December 31, 2010.
 
 
 /s/ Goldman Kurland and Mohidin LLP
 Goldman Kurland and Mohidin LLP
 Encino, California
 
 October 5, 2011
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Apolonio REYNA-MATA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-40637.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 23, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Timothy William Crooks, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

*199PER CURIAM: *

Apolonio Reyna-Mata appeals his guilty plea conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after having been previously deported following a prior aggravated felony conviction. He argues that the “felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1826(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*580 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000).

Reyna-Mata’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Reyna-Mata contends that *AlmendarezTorres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi,*we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *Almendarez-Torres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Reyna-Mata properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
### **CHAPTER 158—ORDERS OF FEDERAL AGENCIES; REVIEW**

Sec.
2341.
Definitions.
2342.
Jurisdiction of court of appeals.
2343.
Venue.
2344.
Review of orders; time; notice; contents of petition; service.
2345.
Prehearing conference.
2346.
Certification of record on review.
2347.
Petitions to review; proceedings.
2348.
Representation in proceeding; intervention.
2349.
Jurisdiction of the proceeding.
2350.
Review in Supreme Court on certiorari or certification.
2351.
Enforcement of orders by district courts.
[2352, 2353. Repealed.]

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1982**—Pub. L. 97–164, title I, §138, Apr. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 42, struck out item 2353 "Decision of the Plant Variety Protection Office".

**1966**—Pub. L. 89–773, §4, Nov. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 1323, struck out item 2352 "Rules".
###### Editorial Note on Part 120

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### §§ 120.714-120.715 [Reserved]
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-1313V 

Filed: January 17, 2017

UNPUBLISHED

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

ELAINE ROSS, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

v. * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Shoulder

 * Injury Related to Vaccine Administration

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SPU”)

 * 

 Respondent. * 

 * 

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

Carol L. Gallagher, Esquire, LLC, Linwood, NJ, for petitioner.

Darryl R. Wishard, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On October 11, 2016, Elaine Ross (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation 

under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et 

seq.,

2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury from an

influenza (“flu”) vaccination she received on October 22, 2014. Petition at 1. The case 

was assigned to the Special Processing Unit (“SPU”) of the Office of Special Masters.

On January 17, 2017, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) Report conceding that 

petitioner is entitled to compensation. Rule 4(c) Rep. at 1. Based on her evaluation of 

the evidence, respondent concluded that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with a 

shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), and that it was caused by 

the flu vaccination she received on October 22, 2014. Id. at 4. Respondent did not 

identify any other causes for petitioner’s SIRVA, and petitioner’s records demonstrate 

that she suffered residuals of her condition for more than six months. Id. Therefore, 

 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2

based on the record as it now stands, petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for 

compensation under the Vaccine Act. Id. at 4-5.

In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence of record, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. The scope of 

damages to be awarded will be limited to petitioner’s left SIRVA and its related 

sequela.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

Chief Special Master
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-10978

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CHRISTINE T. MCDOWELL,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:96-CR-140-X

- - - - - - - - - -

March 25, 1997

Before WISDOM, KING and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Christine T. McDowell appeals her sentence following a

guilty plea and conviction for making, uttering, and possessing

counterfeit securities. 18 U.S.C. § 513(a). McDowell argues

that the district court erred in upwardly departing by increasing

her offense level rather than by considering each intermediate

criminal history category. She argues that the district court’s

justification for the extent of the departure was erroneous. She

also contends that the court relied on a factor already
No. 96-10978

- 2 -

considered by the guidelines in upwardly departing. McDowell has

not demonstrated plain error with respect to her arguments that

the district court abused its discretion in imposing an upward

departure from the guidelines. United States v. Olano, 507 U.S.

725, 731-37 (1993); Koon v. United States, 116 S. Ct. 2035, 2047-

48 (1996).

AFFIRMED.