alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §18812. Leveraging existing agency programs to assist small and medium manufacturers

The Secretary shall expand the scope of technologies covered by the industrial research and assessment centers of the Department—

(1) to include smart manufacturing technologies and practices; and

(2) to equip the directors of the industrial research and assessment centers with the training and tools necessary to provide technical assistance in smart manufacturing technologies and practices, including energy management systems, to manufacturers.

(Pub. L. 117–58, div. D, title V, §40532, Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 1069.)

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

#### Wage Rate Requirements

For provisions relating to rates of wages to be paid to laborers and mechanics on projects for construction, alteration, or repair work funded under div. D or an amendment by div. D of Pub. L. 117–58, including authority of Secretary of Labor, see section 18851 of this title.
§ 250.1 Cross-border antifraud law-enforcement authority. ( a ) Notwithstanding any other Commission rule or regulation, the antifraud provisions of the securities laws apply to: ( 1 ) Conduct within the United States that constitutes significant steps in furtherance of the violation; or
( 2 ) Conduct occurring outside the United States that has a foreseeable substantial effect within the United States.
( b ) The antifraud provisions of the securities laws apply to conduct described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section even if: ( 1 ) The violation relates to a securities transaction or securities transactions occurring outside the United States that involves only foreign investors; or
( 2 ) The violation is committed by a foreign adviser and involves only foreign investors.
( c ) Violations of the antifraud provisions of the securities laws described in this section may be pursued in judicial proceedings brought by the Commission or the United States.
132 STAT. 5436 PUBLIC LAW 115–416—JAN. 3, 2019 

Public Law 115–416 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To provide access to and manage the distribution of excess or surplus property 

to veteran-owned small businesses. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans Small Business 

Enhancement Act of 2018’’. 

SEC. 2. ACCESS TO SURPLUS PROPERTY FOR VETERAN-OWNED SMALL 

BUSINESSES. 

Section 32 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657b) is 

amended by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(g) ACCESS TO SURPLUS PROPERTY FOR VETERAN-OWNED SMALL

BUSINESSES.— 

‘‘(1) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection— 

‘‘(A) the term ‘foreign excess property’ has the meaning 

given the term in section 102 of title 40, United States 

Code; and 

‘‘(B) the term ‘state agency’ has the meaning given 

the term, including the roles and responsibilities assigned, 

in section 549 of title 40, United States Code. 

‘‘(2) REQUIREMENT.—The Administrator, in coordination 

with the Administrator of General Services, shall provide access 

to and manage the distribution of surplus property, and foreign 

excess property returned to a State for handling as surplus 

property, owned by the United States under chapter 7 of title 

40, United States Code, to small business concerns owned and 

controlled by veterans (as verified by the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs under section 8127 of title 38, United States Code) 

pursuant to a memorandum of agreement between the Administrator, the Administrator of General Services, and the head 

Coordination. 

Veterans Small 

Business 

Enhancement 

Act of 2018. 

15 USC 631 note. 

Jan. 3, 2019 

[S. 2679] 


dkrause on DSKBC28HB2PROD with PUBLAWS
PUBLIC LAW 115–416—JAN. 3, 2019 132 STAT. 5437 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 2679: 

SENATE REPORTS: No. 115–414 (Comm. on Small Business and Entrepreneurship). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018): 

Dec. 6, considered and passed Senate. 

Dec. 20, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

of the applicable state agency for surplus properties and in 

accordance with section 549 of title 40, United States Code.’’. 

Approved January 3, 2019. 


dkrause on DSKBC28HB2PROD with PUBLAWS
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3872 

To provide a prize to the first manufacturer of highly-efficient mid-sized 

automobiles powered by gasoline. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2012 

Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide a prize to the first manufacturer of highlyefficient mid-sized automobiles powered by gasoline. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Excellence in Energy 

5 Efficiency Act of 2012’’ or the ‘‘E Prize Act of 2012’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PRIZE TO FIRST MANUFACTURER OF HIGHLY-EFFI7 CIENT MID-SIZED AUTOMOBILES POWERED 

8 BY GASOLINE. 

9 The Secretary of Energy shall establish a program 

10 to award a prize in the amount of $1,000,000,000 to the 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3872 IH

1 first automobile manufacturer incorporated in the United 

2 States to manufacture and sell in the United States 

3 60,000 mid-sized sedan automobiles which operate on gas4 oline and can travel 100 miles per gallon. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Part 5323 - Environment, Energy and Water Efficiency, Renewable Energy Technologies, Occupational Safety, and Drug-Free Workplace       DAFFARS PART 5323 Knowledge Center          *Revised: June 2023*                                       Subpart 5323.3 — HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION AND MATERIAL SAFETY DATA                                                         5323.370-4 Procedures                                                                             Subpart 5323.8 — OZONE-DEPLETING SUBSTANCES                                                         5323.803 Policy                                                            5323.804-90 Contract Clauses                                                                             Subpart 5323.90 — HEALTH AND SAFETY ON GOVERNMENT INSTALLATIONS                                                         5323.9001 Contract Clause    Subpart 5323.3 — HAZARDOUS MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION AND MATERIAL SAFETY DATA               5323.370-4  Procedures       (1) *Preaward phase.*         (i)(A)*(2)* See MP5301.601(a)(i).Subpart 5323.8 — OZONE-DEPLETING SUBSTANCES                    5323.803  Policy       (a) Requiring activities must obtain approval in accordance with AFMAN 32-7002 Environmental Compliance and Pollution Prevention, paragraph 3.3.5.1.1.8 before a specification or standard that requires the use of a class I ozone-depleting substance (ODS), or that can be met only through the use of an ODS, is authorized in any solicitation or contract/order.5323.804-90  Contract Clauses       Include DAFFARS clause 5352.223-9000 in all solicitations and contracts/orders unless the requiring activity obtains the approval IAW paragraph 5323.803(a) above. If approval is obtained, the contracting officer must instead use FAR clause 52.223-11.Subpart 5323.90 — HEALTH AND SAFETY ON GOVERNMENT INSTALLATIONS               5323.9001  Contract Clause       The contracting officer may insert DAFFARS clause 5352.223-9001 in solicitations and contracts, other than for construction, which require performance on a Government installation if needed. The contracting officer should coordinate these requirements with the Chief Engineer and include this clause only for efforts where these requirements are not already spelled out in the technical requirements documents which will also be included in the resultant contract.
Autonomy and Socialization

Abstract

Kirstie L. Bellman, Ph.D.

AISC

The Aerospace Corporation

For quite some time it has been popular to study intelligence within the context of

autonomous systems. When studying autonomous systems, the focus is often on the

adaptive perceptual, behavioral and cognitive capabilities of an individual within some

operational environment. However, if we look at the behavior of biological systems, we

see dependency on other individuals as well as autonomy, and capabilities for coping as a

member of a population as well as coping as an individual. Of course, there is enormous

diversity in how frequently or in what manner the members of a given biological

population interact.

In the past, many researchers, while they recognized the importance of animal

populations and group behaviors, took the scientific strategy of focusing first on

discovering the mechanisms for the individual’s perception and behavior. They assumed

that such behaviors were somehow more fundamental than group behavior. The strategy

assumed that they could later tackle the additional capabilities needed for social,

cooperative, or interactive behaviors. This paper presents the view that social behaviors

are as fundamentally part of the construction of intelligent behavioral capabilities and as

essential for survival as any individual’s perceptual, cognitive or behavioral capabilities.

This paper also presents our reasons for believing that some type of analogues of social

capabilities are necessary to all autonomous constructed systems, such as “agents” or

robots, if we want intelligent, independent behavior in real world environments. We will

describe the types of capabilities necessary for adaptive behavior in both individual and

social behavior. We will then discuss how social behaviors, cultures, and cooperative

behaviors enhance the capabilities for individual autonomous behavior.
* Under 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except in the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-40531 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ARTURO CRUZ, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. M-95-CR-127-3

- - - - - - - - - - August 14, 1998 Before WISDOM, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges
PER CURIAM: * Arturo Cruz appeals his jury conviction of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana. He argues that the district court’s jury instruction did not adequately advise the jury of the participation element of the offense. Cruz did not object to the jury charge in the district court. We review this issue for plain error. See United States v. Mitchell , 31 F.3d 271, 276 (5th Cir. 1994). The district court instructed the jury that conspiracy consisted of these elements: 1) an agreement between two parties to commit anNo. 97-40531 -2- illegal act; 2) knowledge of the unlawful nature of the agreement; and 3) a voluntary joining of the agreement with the intent to further its unlawful purpose. This instruction was sufficient to advise the jury of the participation element of the offense. The district court did not commit plain error. See Mitchell , 31 F.3d at 276; see also United States v. Calverley , 37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994)(en banc)(citing United States v. Olano , 507 U.S. 725, 730-35 (1993)). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
#### § 201.56 Decision.

The administrative law judge shall issue an initial decision on the application promptly after completion of proceedings on the application. The decision shall include written findings and conclusions on the applicant's eligibility and status as a prevailing party, and an explanation of the reasons for any difference between the amount requested and the amount awarded. The decision shall also include, if at issue, findings on whether the Commission's position was substantially justified, whether the applicant unduly protracted the proceedings, or whether special circumstances make an award unjust.
### §1974. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 1974 was editorially reclassified as section 20701 of Title 52, Voting and Elections.
534.202 Integrated Baseline Reviews (IBR).

GSA policy prohibits the conduct of pre-award Integrated Baseline Reviews (IBR). Therefore, when

an Integrated Baseline Review is conducted, it shall be conducted after award.

Parent topic: Subpart 534.2 - Earned Value Management Systems.
#### § 242.820 Core Principle 3—Security-based swaps not readily susceptible to manipulation.

The security-based swap execution facility shall permit trading only in security-based swaps that are not readily susceptible to manipulation.
#### Fatou JOBE, Petitioner, v. Peter D. KEISLER, Acting Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 07-1193.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Sept. 14, 2007.

Decided: Sept. 27, 2007.

Edwin K. Fogam, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Michelle Gorden Latour, Assistant Director, Jeffrey J.

Bernstein, Senior Litigation Counsel, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before MICHAEL, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Fatou Jobe, a native and citizen of The Gambia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) adopting and affirming the immigration judge’s finding that she was not eligible for cancellation of removal because she failed to show continuous ten year presence in the United States. We deny the petition for review.

The Attorney General may cancel removal of an alien who is deportable from the United States if the alien: (1) has been physically present in the United States for a continuous period of not less than 10 years immediately preceding the date of such application; (2) has been a person of good moral character during such period; (3) has not been convicted of certain enumerated offenses; and (4) establishes that removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to the alien’s spouse, parent, or child, who is a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence. 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1) (2000). The applicant bears the burden of showing eligibility for cancellation of removal. *Tapia v. Gonzales,*430 F.3d 997, 997-98 (9th Cir.2005). Under 8 U.S.C.A. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (West 2005), “the administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.” We find the evidence does not compel a different result.

*911Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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.

*PETITION DENIED.*
Editorial Note on Part 240
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 240 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

§ 240.15d-21 Reports for employee stock purchase, savings and similar plans. ( a ) Separate annual and other reports need not be filed pursuant to section 15(d) of the Act with respect to any employee stock purchase, savings or similar plan: *Provided,* ( 1 ) The issuer of the stock or other securities offered to employees through their participation in the plan files annual reports on Form 10-K (§ 249.310 of this chapter); and
( 2 ) Such issuer furnishes, as a part of its annual report on such form or as an amendment thereto, the financial statements required by Form 11-K (§ 249.311 of this chapter) with respect to the plan.
( b ) If the procedure permitted by this Rule is followed, the financial statements required by Form 11-K with respect to the plan shall be filed within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year of the plan, either as a part of or as an amendment to the annual report of the issuer for its last fiscal year, *provided that* if the fiscal year of the plan ends within 62 days prior to the end of the fiscal year of the issuer, such information, financial statements and exhibits may be furnished as a part of the issuer's next annual report. If a plan subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 uses the procedure permitted by this Rule, the financial statements required by Form 11-K shall be filed within 180 days after the plan's fiscal year end.
[27 FR 7871, Aug. 9, 1962, as amended at 55 FR 23929, June 13, 1990; 73 FR 979, Jan. 4, 2008]
**
Exhibit 35.1 

Servicer Compliance Statement of Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation 

**NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION**

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE**

The undersigned, Kevin J. Cullum, President and Chief Executive Officer of NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, a California corporation (the“Company”), does hereby certify, in his capacity as such corporate officer, as follows: 

(1) The undersigned has caused a reviewof the activities of the Company, in its capacity as Servicer, during period July 24, 2019 through March 31, 2020 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance pursuant to the Servicing Agreement, dated as of March 1,1999, as amended and as supplemented by the 2019-B SUBI Servicing Supplement, dated as of July 24, 2019 (as supplemented, the “Agreement”), by and among Nissan-Infiniti LT, as titling trust,NILT Trust, as UTI beneficiary, and the Company, as servicer, to be conducted under his supervision; and 

(2) To the best of theundersigned’s knowledge, based upon such review, the Company has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period. 

This Officer’s Certificate is being furnished pursuant to Item 1123 of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB forpublicly-issued asset-backed securities. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand effective as of the 26th day of June, 2020. 

 

/s/ Kevin J. Cullum
Kevin J. CullumPresident and Chief Executive Officer**
#### John M. Kelly, Appellant, v Sara S. Ashcraft et al., Respondents.

[820 NYS2d 833]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Harold L. Galloway, J.), entered May 2, 2005. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that part of the motion of defendants Sara S. Ashcraft and Law Firm of Ashcraft, Franklin and Young, LLP to dismiss the complaint against them.

*1194It is hereby ordered, that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated in decision at Supreme Court. Present — Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Martoche and Green, JJ.
### §1987. Prosecution of violation of certain laws

The United States attorneys, marshals, and deputy marshals, the United States magistrate judges appointed by the district and territorial courts, with power to arrest, imprison, or bail offenders, and every other officer who is especially empowered by the President, are authorized and required, at the expense of the United States, to institute prosecutions against all persons violating any of the provisions of section 1990 of this title or of sections 5506 to 5516 and 5518 to 5532 of the Revised Statutes, and to cause such persons to be arrested, and imprisoned or bailed, for trial before the court of the United States or the territorial court having cognizance of the offense.

(R.S. §1982; Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167; June 25, 1948, ch. 646, §1, 62 Stat. 909; Pub. L. 90–578, title IV, §402(b)(2), Oct. 17, 1968, 82 Stat. 1118; Pub. L. 101–650, title III, §321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5117.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Sections 5506 to 5510, 5516 to 5519 and 5524 to 5535 of the Revised Statutes, referred to in text, were repealed by act Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, §341, 35 Stat. 1153; section 5506, 5511 to 5515, and 5520 to 5523, also referred to in text, were repealed by act Feb. 8, 1894, ch. 25, §1, 28 Stat. 37. The provisions of sections 5508, 5510, 5516, 5518 and 5524 to 5532 of the Revised Statutes were reenacted by act Mar. 4, 1909, and classified to sections 51, 52, 54 to 59, 246, 428 and 443 to 445 of former Title 18, Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure. Those sections were repealed and reenacted as sections 241, 242, 372, 592, 593, 752, 1071, 1581, 1583 and 1588 of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, in the general revision of Title 18 by act June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 683.

#### Codification

R.S. §1982 derived from acts Apr. 9, 1866, ch. 31, §4, 14 Stat. 28; May 31, 1870, Ch. 114, §9, 16 Stat. 142.

Section was formerly classified to section 49 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

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

#### Change of Name

Act June 25, 1948, eff. Sept. 1, 1948, substituted "United States attorneys" for "district attorneys". See section 541 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, and Historical and Revision Notes thereunder.

"United States magistrate judges" substituted in text for "magistrates" pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101–650, set out as a note under section 631 of Title 28. Previously, "magistrates" substituted for "commissioners" pursuant to Pub. L. 90–578. See chapter 43 (§631 et seq.) of Title 28.

Reference to the district courts substituted for reference to the circuit courts on authority of act Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §291, 36 Stat. 1167.
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 91 (Tuesday, May 12, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 27224]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-11458]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 9130]

U.S. National Commission for UNESCO Notice of Teleconference 
Meeting

    The U.S. National Commission for UNESCO will hold a conference call 
on Friday, June 12, 2015, from 11:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m. Eastern 
Time. The purpose of the teleconference meeting is to consider the 
recommendations of the Commission's National Committee for the 
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC). The call will also be 
an opportunity to provide an update on recent and upcoming Commission 
and UNESCO activities. The Commission will accept brief oral comments 
during a portion of this conference call. The public comment period 
will be limited to approximately 10 minutes in total, with two minutes 
allowed per speaker. For more information or to arrange to participate 
in the conference call, individuals must make arrangements with the 
Executive Director of the National Commission by June 10.
    The National Commission, Washington, DC 20037 may be contacted via 
email DCUNESCO@state.gov or Telephone (202) 663-0026; Fax (202) 663-
0035. The Web site can be accessed at: http://www.state.gov/p/io/unesco/.

    Dated: May 6, 2015.
Allison Wright,
Executive Director, U.S. National Commission for UNESCO, Department of 
State.
[FR Doc. 2015-11458 Filed 5-11-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4710-19-P
```