alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Wanji W., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[716 NYS2d 676]

—In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Lubow, J.), dated May 11, 1999, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated March 15, 1999, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of attempted assault in the third degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent and placed him with *244the New York State Office of Children and Family Services for a period of one year. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated March 15, 1999.

Ordered that the order of disposition is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the fact-finding order is vacated, and the petition is dismissed.

The Family Court erred in finding that evidence of the appellant’s conduct offered by the Presentment Agency was legally sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of attempted assault in the third degree. To prove attempted assault in the third degree, sufficient evidence must0be presented to infer that the appellant intended to cause physical injury to the complainant, and engaged in conduct that came “dangerously near” to an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime (Penal Law § 120.00; *People v Acosta,*80 NY2d 665; *Matter of Marcel F.,*233 AD2d 442). Physical injury is defined as physical impairment or substantial pain *(see,*Penal Law § 10.00 [9]). Here, the 11-year-old appellant slapped the 15-year-old complainant in the back of the head and followed him into a laundromat. Viewed in the light most favorable to the Presentment Agency *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), the appellant’s conduct did not rise above the level of petty slaps, shoves, or kicks, and thus, does not allow a fact-finder to rationally infer that the appellant intended to cause physical injury to the complainant *(see, People v Henderson,*92 NY2d 677; *Matter of Kisha J.,*225 AD2d 549; *People v Facey,*115 AD2d 11, *affd*69 NY2d 836). Accordingly, the petition must be dismissed. Altman, J. P., Friedmann, Krausman and Smith, JJ., concur.
§ 10.34 Limited participation. ( a ) *Petitions for leave to be heard.* Any person may, in the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge, be given leave to be heard in any proceeding as to any matter affecting his interests. Petitions for leave to be heard shall be in writing, shall set forth ( 1 ) the nature and extent of the applicant's interest in the proceeding;
( 2 ) the issues on which he wishes to participate; and
( 3 ) in what manner he wishes to participate. The Administrative Law Judge may direct any person requesting leave to be heard to submit himself to examination as to his interest in the proceeding.
( b ) *Rights of a participant.* Leave to be heard pursuant to § 10.34(a) may include such rights of a party as the Administrative Law Judge may deem appropriate, except that oral argument before the Commission may be permitted only by the Commission.
132 STAT. 5442 PUBLIC LAW 115–419—JAN. 3, 2019 

Public Law 115–419 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To amend chapter 5 of title 40, United States Code, to improve the management 

of Federal personal property. 

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 ‘‘Federal Personal Property 

Management Act of 2018’’. 

SEC. 2. FEDERAL PERSONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT. 

(a) INVENTORY ASSESSING AND IDENTIFYING EXCESS PERSONAL

PROPERTY.—Section 524(a) of title 40, United States Code, is 

amended— 

(1) in paragraph (11), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end; 

(2) in paragraph (12), by striking the period at the end 

and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

(3) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(13) in accordance with guidance from the Administrator 

of General Services— 

‘‘(A) on an annual basis, conduct an inventory and 

assessment of capitalized personal property to identify 

excess capitalized personal property under its control, 

including evaluating— 

‘‘(i) the age and condition of the personal property; 

‘‘(ii) the extent to which the executive agency utilizes the personal property; 

‘‘(iii) the extent to which the mission of the executive agency is dependent on the personal property; 

and 

‘‘(iv) any other aspect of the personal property 

that the Administrator determines is useful or necessary for the executive agency to evaluate; and 

‘‘(B) on a regular basis, conduct an inventory and 

assessment of accountable personal property under its control, including evaluating— 

‘‘(i) the age and condition of the personal property; 

‘‘(ii) the extent to which the executive agency utilizes the personal property; 

‘‘(iii) the extent to which the mission of the executive agency is dependent on the personal property; 

and 

‘‘(iv) any other aspect of the personal property 

that the Administrator determines is useful or necessary for the executive agency to evaluate.’’. 

Guidance. 

Evaluations. 

Federal Personal 

Property 

Management Act 

of 2018. 

40 USC 101 note. 

Jan. 3, 2019 

[S. 3031] 


smartinez on DSK30VT082PROD with PUBLAWS
PUBLIC LAW 115–419—JAN. 3, 2019 132 STAT. 5443 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—S. 3031: 

SENATE REPORTS: No. 115–343 (Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018): 

Dec. 12, considered and passed Senate. 

Dec. 21, considered and passed House. 

Æ 

(b) THRESHOLDS FOR CAPITALIZATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY.— Section 506(a)(1) of title 40, United States Code, is amended by 

adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(E) CAPITALIZATION THRESHOLDS.—Establish thresholds for acquisitions of personal property for which executive agencies shall capitalize the personal property. 

‘‘(F) ACCOUNTABILITY THRESHOLDS.—Notwithstanding 

section 121(b), for the management and accountability of 

personal property, establish thresholds for acquisitions of 

personal property for which executive agencies shall establish and maintain property records in a centralized 

system.’’. 

Approved January 3, 2019. 


smartinez on DSK30VT082PROD with PUBLAWS
1 The Honorable G. Thomas Eisele, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 00-1866

___________ Billy Mack Nichols, Jr., * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Kevin Simpson, Detective; Little Rock * Eastern District of Arkansas Police Department; Stuart Fijo; * George Fijo, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: July 7, 2000 Filed: July 12, 2000

___________ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Arkansas inmate Billy Mack Nichols, Jr., appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court 1 for the Eastern District of Arkansas, dismissing under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. For reversal appellant argues the-2-

district court erred in dismissing his complaint under Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477, 486-88 (1994). For the reasons discussed below, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
Nichols alleged that appellees tampered with evidence and committed perjury during the proceedings underlying his state convictions for kidnapping, aggravated robbery, and theft. He claimed that appellees’ actions caused him emotional and mental injury, and resulted in his incarceration. Any claim that the complained-of conduct resultedin his incarceration, however, is Heck -barred. See id. at 486-87 (in order to recover damages for allegedly unconstitutional conviction or imprisonment, or for other harm caused by actions whose unlawfulness would render conviction or sentence invalid, § 1983 plaintiff must prove that conviction or sentence has been overturned). We are unable to discern how appellees’ alleged wrongful conduct, which Nichols claims constitutes a violation of state penal law, otherwise violated his federal civil rights. See Buckley v. Barlow , 997 F.2d 494, 495 (8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam) (42 U.S.C. § 1983 plaintiff must allege violation of federal or Constitutional right). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
§ 1508.750 What does the suspending official consider in deciding whether to continue or terminate my suspension? ( a ) The suspending official bases the decision on all information contained in the official record. The record includes— ( 1 ) All information in support of the suspending official's initial decision to suspend you;
( 2 ) Any further information and argument presented in support of, or opposition to, the suspension; and
( 3 ) Any transcribed record of fact-finding proceedings.
( b ) The suspending official may refer disputed material facts to another official for findings of fact. The suspending official may reject any resulting findings, in whole or in part, only after specifically determining them to be arbitrary, capricious, or clearly erroneous.
#### § 274.202 Form 3, initial statement of beneficial ownership of securities.

This form shall be filed pursuant to § 270.30h-1 for initial statements of beneficial ownership of securities required to be filed pursuant to section 30(h) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a-29(h)). (Same as § 249.103 of this chapter.)

[67 FR 43537, June 28, 2002]

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations affecting Form 3, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*
§ 1101.11 Fees. ( a ) Under the Act, fees can only be charged for the cost of copying records. No fees may be charged for the time it takes to search for the records or for the time it takes to determine if any exemptions apply. The Section will not charge a fee for the first copy of an individual's personnel record.
( b ) The Section will charge a fee of $0.10 per page for copies of documents which are identified by an individual and reproduced at the individual's request for retention, except that there will be no charge for requests involving costs of $1.00 or less, but the copying fees for contemporaneous request by the same individual shall be aggregated to determine the total fee.
( c ) Special and additional services provided at the request of the individual, such as certification or authentication, will be charged to the individual in accordance with other published regulations of the Section pursuant to statute (for example, 22 CFR part 1102—Freedom of Information Act.)
( d ) Remittances shall be in the form of either a personal check or bank draft drawn on a bank in the United States, a postal money order, or cash. Remittance shall be made payable to the order of the U.S. Section, International Boundary and Water Commission, and delivered to or mailed to the PA Officer, United States Section, International Boundary and Water Commission, 4171 North Mesa, Suite C-310, El Paso, TX 79902-1422. The Section will assume no responsibility for cash sent by mail.
( e ) A receipt for fees paid will be given only upon request.
§ 1506.37 What are the criteria for suspension? ( a ) USADF may suspend collection action on a debt when: ( 1 ) The debtor cannot be located;
( 2 ) The debtor's financial condition is expected to improve; or
( 3 ) The debtor has requested a waiver or review of the debt.
( b ) Based on the current financial condition of the debtor, USADF may suspend collection activity on a debt when the debtor's future prospects justify retention of the claim for periodic review, and: ( 1 ) The applicable statute of limitations has not expired; or
( 2 ) Future collection can be effected by offset; or
( 3 ) The debtor agrees to pay interest on the debt and suspension is likely to enhance the debtor's ability to fully pay the principal amount of the debt with interest at a later date.
( c ) USADF will suspend collection activity during the time required for waiver consideration or administrative review prior to agency collection of a debt if the statute under which the request is sought prohibits the Agency from collecting the debt during that time. USADF will ordinarily suspend collection action during the pendency of its consideration of a waiver request or administrative review where statute and regulation preclude refund of amounts collected by the Agency should the debtor prevail.
( d ) USADF may suspend collection activities on debts of $100,000 or less during the pendency of a permissive waiver or administrative review when there is no statutory requirement and where it determines that: ( 1 ) There is a reasonable possibility that waiver will be granted and the debtor may be found not owing the debt (in whole or in part);
( 2 ) The Government's interest is protected, if suspension is granted, by the reasonable assurance that the debt can be recovered if the debtor does not prevail; or
( 3 ) Collection of the debt will cause undue hardship to the debtor.
( e ) USADF will decline to suspend collection where it determines that the request for waiver or administrative review is frivolous or was made primarily to delay collection.
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.

§ 240.18a-2 Capital requirements for major security-based swap participants for which there is not a prudential regulator. ( a ) Every major security-based swap participant for which there is not a prudential regulator and is not registered as a broker or dealer pursuant to section 15(b) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78o(b)) must at all times have and maintain positive tangible net worth.
( b ) The term *tangible net worth* means the net worth of the major security-based swap participant as determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States, excluding goodwill and other intangible assets. In determining net worth, all long and short positions in security-based swaps, swaps, and related positions must be marked to their market value. A major security-based swap participant must include in its computation of tangible net worth all liabilities or obligations of a subsidiary or affiliate that the participant guarantees, endorses, or assumes either directly or indirectly.
( c ) Every major security-based swap participant must comply with § 240.15c3-4 as though it were an OTC derivatives dealer with respect to its security-based swap and swap activities, except that § 240.15c3-4(c)(5)(xiii) and (xiv) and (d)(8) and (9) shall not apply.
[84 FR 44068, Aug. 22, 2019]
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 21, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-40339

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LUIS GONZALEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:93-CR-96-1

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

Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Luis Gonzalez, federal prisoner # 04434-078, appeals the

district court’s denial of his motion for modification of his

sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). Gonzalez was

convicted of possession with intent to distribute cocaine. 

Gonzalez argues that Amendment 528 merely clarifies the career

offender guideline and, therefore, he need not establish the

retroactivity requirement of 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2).
No. 03-40339

-2-

The language of the statute provides that a district

court may not modify a term of imprisonment pursuant to 18 U.S.C.

§ 3582(c)(2) unless the term has been subsequently lowered by an

amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2);

see United States v. Gonzalez-Balderas, 105 F.3d 981, 982 (5th

Cir. 1997). An amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines may not be

applied retroactively upon a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

unless it is specifically set forth in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c). 

U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(a), p.s. (Nov. 2001). Because Amendment 528

is not listed in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c), it may not be applied

retroactively on Gonzalez’s motion. See United States v. Drath,

89 F.3d 216, 218 (5th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, the district

court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Gonzalez’s

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion. 

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





I, Richard C. Ford, Chief Executive Officer of Puradyn Filter Technologies
Incorporated ("the Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

1.   The quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended
     June 30, 2005 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
     Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.78m); and

2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                 August 15, 2005


                                 /s/ Richard C. Ford
                                 -------------------
                                 Name: Richard C. Ford
                                 Title: Chief Executive Officer
August 3, 2011

Joseph A. Jennings

15211 Coronado St. Westminster, CA 92683

Dear Mr. Jennings:

This letter is to inform you that we have received and begun processing your petition for exemption. It acknowledges receipt of the petition and describes how we will process it.

We Have the Petition

We’ve received your June 6, 2011, petition for an exemption from § 21.197(a)(1) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). This exemption, if granted, would allow you to issue functional check flight permits.

We’ve added your petition to the public docket (No. FAA-2011-0626) and we are processing it. We will contact you if we need additional information.

How We’ll Process the Petition

A petition for an exem ption, according to 14 CFR 11.63(d), must be sent to the FAA at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. In addition, we publish a summary of the petition in the Federal Register for public comment unless, according to 14 CFR 11.87, we determine that good cause exists for not publishing it.

We will advise you of the agency's final decision on your petition as soon as possible. If you have any questions in the meantime, you may contact me at (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Frances Shaver Program Analyst Aircraft and Airport Rules Division
Exhibit 10.6

Addendum to Letter Employment Agreement of December 1, 2003

This
Addendum to Michelle A. Peluso's Letter Employment Agreement of December 1, 2003 (the "Agreement") is entered into effective as March [    ], 2006, by and
between Travelocity.com LP (the "Company") and Michelle A. Peluso ("Employee").

The
Company and Employee hereby agree that the provisions of Section 6(b) (Termination Other Than for Cause) of the Agreement shall be replaced with the following language:



---





Accepted
and agreed to:

|Michelle A. Peluso |  |  |  | Michael E. Haefner
Senior Vice President, Human Resources
Sabre Inc.
As agent for Travelocity.com LP
|------------------ |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2

---



QuickLinks
FORM 13F COVER PAGE

Report for the Calendar Year or Quarter Ended: December 31,2003

Check here if Amendment [   ]; Amendment Number:
This Amendment (Check only one.):  [   ] is a restatement.
                                   [   ] adds new holdings entries.

Institutional Investment Manager Filing this Report:

Name:    The Continental Corporation
Address: CNA Plaza
	 Chicago,IL 60685


13F File Number:  28-172

The institutional investment manager filing this report and the
person by whom it is signed hereby represent that the person
signing the report is authorized to submit it, that all
information contained herein is true, correct, and complete, and
that it is understood that all required items, statements,
schedules, lists, and tables, are considered integral parts of
this form.


Person Signing this Report on Behalf of Reporting Manager:

Name: Karla L. Kambic
Title: Vice President and Associate General Counsel
Phone: (312) 822 1337
Signature, Place, and Date of Signing:
February 12,2004
Chicago, Illinois,60685
I AM SIGNING THIS REPORT AS REQUIRED BY THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934

Report Type (Check only one.):

 [    ]              13F HOLDINGS REPORT.

 [  x ]              13F NOTICE.

 [    ]              13F COMBINATION REPORT.

List of Other Managers Reporting for this Manager:

The securities on which The Continental Corporation exercises
shared investment discretion have been reported upon by CNA Financial
Corporation on behalf of The Continental Corporation.
<Page>
#### Gloria Perez, Appellant, v Cejust Management, Inc., et al., Respondents.

[715 NYS2d 883]

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Arniotes, J.), dated January 6, 2000, which, in effect, denied her motion for leave to enter a judgment against the defendants upon their failure to appear or answer, and granted the defendants’ cross motion for leave to serve a late answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s motion and granting the defendants’ cross motion *(see, Morgese v Laro Maintenance Corp.,*251 AD2d 307; *Classie v Stratton Oakmont,*236 AD2d 505; *Workman v Amato,*231 AD2d 627). Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Florio, JJ., concur.