alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
----

----

| INDIANA                                  |   | 1-7160                   |   | 35-1101097          |
|------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------|--------|---------------------|
| (State or other jurisdiction             |   | (Commission File Number) |   | (I.R.S. Employer    |
| of incorporation or organization)        |   |                     |   | Identification No.) |
|                                     |   |                     |   |                |
| 2831 Dexter Drive, Elkhart, Indiana      |   |                     |   | 46514               |
| (Address of Principal Executive Offices) |   |                     |   | (Zip Code)          |
|                                     |   |                     |   |                |
|                                     |   | (574) 266-2500           |   |                |
| (Registrant’s telephone number,    |
| including area code)                     |
|                                     |   |                     |   |                |
|                                     |   | N / A                    |   |                |
| (Former Name or Former Address,          |
| if Changed Since Last Report)            |

| □ | Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)                  |
|---------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| □ | Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)                 |
| □ | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) |
| □ | Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) |

----

|   | (d)  The following exhibit is furnished as a part of this Report: |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

| Date:  | February 1, 2010 |   | By:    | /s/ James T. Holden        |
|--------|------------------|--------|--------|----------------------------|
|   |             |   |   |                       |
|   |             |   |   | James T. Holden, Secretary |
|   |             |   |   | Printed Name and Title     |

----

----
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 8, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 71078]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26972]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice (04-143)]


Notice of Establishment of a NASA Advisory Committee, Pursuant to 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App 1 et seq.

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
    Explanation of Need: The Administrator of the National Aeronautics 
and Space Administration has determined that the establishment of a 
NASA Solar System Exploration Strategic Roadmap Committee is necessary 
and in the public interest in connection with the performance of duties 
imposed upon NASA by law. This determination follows consultation with 
the Committee Management Secretariat, General Services Administration.
    Name of Committee: NASA Solar System Exploration Strategic Roadmap 
Committee.
    Purpose and Objective: The Committee will advise the NASA 
Administrator on conducting robotic exploration across the solar system 
to search for evidence of life, to understand the history of the solar 
system, to search for resources, and to support human exploration. The 
Committee will draw on the expertise of its members and other sources 
to provide its advice and recommendations to the Agency. The Committee 
will hold meetings and make site visits as necessary to accomplish 
their responsibilities. The Committee will function solely as an 
advisory board and will comply fully with the provisions of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act.
    Lack of Duplication of Resources: The Committee's functions cannot 
be performed by the agency, another existing committee, or other means 
such as a public meeting.
    Fairly Balanced Membership: The Committee will consist of a balance 
of experts from within the government, private industry, and academia. 
In addition, there may be additional experts selected for Subcommittees 
or Task Forces. Members of the Committee, Subcommittee or Task Forces 
will be chosen from among industry, academia, and government with 
recognized knowledge and expertise in specific areas across the NASA 
portfolio. Total membership will reflect a fairly balanced view.
    Duration: Ad hoc.
    Responsible NASA Official: Dr. Marc Allen, Advanced Planning and 
Integration Office, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 300 
E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20546, telephone (202) 358-2373.

P. Diane Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 04-26972 Filed 12-7-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 16-2262

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Landein Charles Craddock

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

____________

 Submitted: November 15, 2016

Filed: November 18, 2016

[Unpublished]

____________

Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

After pleading guilty to robbery and firearm charges, Landein Charles

Craddock appeals the district court’s1

 order revoking his supervised release and

1

The Honorable Brian C. Wimes, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.
sentencing him to a total term of 46 months in prison, to run consecutively to a

15-year sentence imposed in the District of Kansas. Having jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Craddock, as the

court imposed the within-Guidelines sentence after considering the 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) factors, and acted within its discretion in imposing consecutive sentences.

See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 917 (8th Cir. 2009) (under

substantive-reasonableness test, district court abuses its discretion if it fails to consider

relevant § 3553(a) factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or

commits clear error of judgment in weighing factors); United States v. Petreikis, 551

F.3d 822, 824 (8th Cir. 2009) (applying presumption of substantive reasonableness

to revocation sentence within Guidelines range); U.S.S.G. § 7B1.3(f) (any term of

imprisonment imposed upon revocation of supervised release shall be ordered to be

served consecutively to any sentence of imprisonment that defendant is serving,

whether or not sentence of imprisonment being served resulted from conduct that is

basis of revocation); United States v. Cotroneo, 89 F.3d 510, 512 (8th Cir. 1996)

(decision to impose consecutive or concurrent sentence upon revocation of supervised

release is committed to sound discretion of district court).

The judgment is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

______________________________

-2-
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential.


# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

BETZAIDA P. JERNIGAN
, Claimant

- Appellant,

v.

ERIC K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent

- Appellee.

______________________

2013

- 7033

______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in No. 10

- 1226, Judge Lawrence B. Hagel.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

S TEVEN M. A MUNDSON , Frommer Lawrence & Haug, LLP, of New York, New York, argued for claimant

appellant. With him on the brief were V ICKI M. F RANKS
, J ULIE E. K URZROK , and M ICHAEL W. H ARKNESS ; and
B RYAN J. B RAUNEL and A NDREW M. N ASON , of Washin gton, DC.

S COTT D. A USTIN , Trial Attorney, Commercial Litig ation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department ofJustice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent

appellee. On the brief were S TUART F. D ELERY , Acting Assistant Attorney General, J EANNE E. D AVIDSON , Dire ctor, M ARTIN F. H OCKEY
, J R

. , Assistant Director, and A LEX P. H ONTOS , Trial Attorney. Of counsel on the brief were
D AVID J. B ARRANS , Deputy Assistant General Counsel and
R ACHAEL T. B RANT , Attorne y, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (N EWMAN
, R EYNA
, and T ARANTO
, Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 3 6.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

July 22

, 2013 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


                                 COMPURAD, INC.
                SCHEDULE REGARDING COMPUTATION OF LOSS PER SHARE
                                   (UNAUDITED)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                  THREE MONTHS ENDED                      SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                                        JUNE 30                                JUNE 30
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                1997               1996               1997               1996
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                         <C>                <C>                <C>                <C>        
Net loss                                                    $   653,366        $   134,125        $   786,886        $   360,906
                                                            ====================================================================

Weighted average common shares
   outstanding                                                3,860,075          2,391,320          3,858,980          2,251,650

Less:  stock issued within one year of initial filing                --           (417,930)                --           (283,177)

Common stock equivalents pursuant to
   SAB No. 83: Stock and options issued
   within one year of initial filing                                 --            636,933                               636,933

Common stock equivalents-dilutive options                            --                 --                 --                 --

Weighted average common shares and
   common share equivalents outstanding
   during the period
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              3,860,075          2,610,323          3,858,980          2,605,406
                                                            ====================================================================

Net loss per common share                                   $     (0.17)       $     (0.05)       $     (0.20)       $     (0.14)
                                                            ====================================================================
</TABLE>
##### 



Exhibit 31.1 PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICERS CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, Gary Greenfield, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of GXS Corporation; 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 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; 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: May 13, 2004
    
    /s/ Gary GreenfieldName: Gary GreenfieldTitle: Chief Executive Officer
### §19018. Intramural emerging research institutions pilot program

#### (a) Establishment

The Director may conduct multiple pilot programs, including through existing programs or other programs authorized in this division or division A, within the Foundation to expand the number of institutions of higher education (including such institutions that are community colleges), and other eligible entities that the Director determines appropriate, that are able to successfully compete for Foundation awards.

#### (b) Components

Pilot programs under this section may include—

(1) a mentorship program;

(2) award application writing technical assistance;

(3) targeted outreach, including to a historically Black college or university, a Tribal college or university, or a minority-serving institution (including a Hispanic-serving institution or an institution of higher education with an established STEM capacity building program focused on Native Hawaiians or Alaska Natives);

(4) programmatic support or solutions for institutions or entities that do not have an experienced award management office;

(5) an increase in the number of award proposal reviewers from institutions of higher education that have not traditionally received funds from the Foundation; or

(6) an increase of the term and funding, for a period of 3 years or less, as appropriate, for awards with a first-time principal investigator, when paired with regular mentoring on the administrative aspects of award management.

#### (c) Limitation

As appropriate, each pilot program under this section shall work to reduce administrative burdens for recipients and award personnel.

#### (d) Agency-wide programs

Not later than 5 years after August 9, 2022, the Director shall—

(1) review the results of the pilot programs under this section; and

(2) develop agencywide best practices from the pilot programs for implementation across the Foundation, in order to fulfill the requirement under section 1862(e) of this title.

(Pub. L. 117–167, div. B, title III, §10330, Aug. 9, 2022, 136 Stat. 1550.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This division, referred to in subsec. (a), is div. B of Pub. L. 117–167, Aug. 9, 2022, 136 Stat. 1399, which enacted this chapter and enacted, amended, and repealed numerous other sections and notes in the Code. For complete classification of div. B to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 18901 of this title and Tables.

Division A, referred to in subsec. (a), is div. A of Pub. L. 117–167, Aug. 9, 2022, 136 Stat. 1372, known as the CHIPS Act of 2022. For complete classification of div. A to the Code, see Short Title of 2022 Amendment note set out under section 4651 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade, and Tables.
3404.000 Scope of part.

Parent topic: PART 3404—ADMINISTRATIVE AND INFORMATION MATTERS
5326.203 TRANSITION OF WORK       (b) See MP5301.601(a)(i).     **Parent topic:** Subpart 5326.2 — MAJOR DISASTER OF EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES
#### § 230.140 Definition of “distribution” in section 2(11) for certain transactions.

A person, the chief part of whose business consists of the purchase of the securities of one issuer, or of two or more affiliated issuers, and the sale of its own securities, including the levying of assessments on its assessable stock and the resale of such stock upon the failure of the holder thereof to pay any assessment levied thereon, to furnish the proceeds with which to acquire the securities of such issuer or affiliated issuers, is to be regarded as engaged in the distribution of the securities of such issuer or affiliated issuers within the meaning of section 2(11) of the Act.

[24 FR 6386, Aug. 8, 1959]
No. 935.

#### Ratigan *v.*United States.

June 1, 1937.

*Mr. Marshall B. Woodworth*for petitioner. *Solicitor General Reed,*Assistant *Attorney General McMahon,*and *Messrs. Wm. W. Barron*and *W. Marvin Smith*for the United States.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
PUBLIC LAW 115–374—DEC. 21, 2018 132 STAT. 5111 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 6428: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018): 

Nov. 29, considered and passed House. 

Dec. 12, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 115–374 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 332 Ramapo 

Valley Road in Oakland, New Jersey, as the ‘‘Frank Leone Post Office’’. 

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 ‘‘Frank Leone Post Office Act’’. 

SEC. 2. FRANK LEONE POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 332 Ramapo Valley Road in Oakland, New Jersey, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Frank Leone Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Frank Leone Post Office’’. 

Approved December 21, 2018. 

Frank Leone Post 

Office Act. 

Dec. 21, 2018 

[H.R. 6428] 


dkrause on DSKBC28HB2PROD with PUBLAWS
§ 300.302 Mechanics of closeout or completion. ( a ) The closeout or completion of an open contractual commitment meeting the requirements of § 300.301 shall be effected only: ( 1 ) By the buy-in or sell-out of the commitment by the other broker or dealer in accordance with the usual trade practices initiated by the other broker or dealer within or promptly upon the expiration of a period of 30 calendar days after settlement date; or
( 2 ) At the option of the trustee by the delivery of securities against receipt of the contract price or payment of the contract price against the receipt of the securities at any time within 30 calendar days after settlement date unless the commitment previously has been bought-in or sold-out in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section; or
( 3 ) In the event of the refusal of the other broker or dealer to accept completion of an open contractual commitment in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of this section, or the failure of the other broker or dealer to promptly buy-in or sell-out a commitment in accordance with paragraph (a)(1) of this section, or in the event of the failure of the other broker or dealer to provide the trustee with appropriate documentation as required by § 300.303, by delivery of securities against receipt of the contract price or payment of the contract price against receipt of securities, or the buy-in or sell-out of the commitment or cancellation of the commitment or otherwise, as may be appropriate, as the trustee in his discretion will most benefit the estate of the debtor.
( b ) In the event of a close-out of an open contractual commitment pursuant to paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the money differences resulting from such close-out shall be payable by the other broker or dealer to the trustee or by the trustee to the other broker or dealer, whichever would be entitled to receive such difference under the usual trade practices: *Provided, however,* ( 1 ) That prior to the payment of any such money difference by the trustee to such other broker or dealer with respect to transactions executed by such other broker or dealer for any separate customer account, all open contractual commitments with respect to such account which meet the requirements of § 300.301 must have been completed by delivery of securities against receipt of the contract price or by payment of the contract price against receipt of the securities in conformity with paragraph (a)(2) of this section, or by buy-in or sell-out in conformity with paragraph (a)(1) of this section, and
( 2 ) that the net amount so payable by the trustee to the other broker or dealer shall not exceed $40,000 with respect to any separate customer account.
#### § 9.7 Settlement.

At any time before there has been a final determination by the Commission with respect to any notice of appeal filed in accordance with § 9.20, the parties may file a stipulation for dismissal based on a settlement agreement. Thereupon, the Commission may issue an order terminating the proceeding before the Commission as to the parties to the settlement agreement. The entry of such an order does not affect the Commission's authority under the Act.
#### § 1300.1 Purpose.

This part describes the organization, functions and operation of the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC). MCC is a government corporation (as defined in 5 U.S.C. 103) established by the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-199, 118 Stat. 211.) Information about MCC is available from its Web site, *http://www.mcc.gov.*
### §§209a, 209b. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 209a, act Dec. 22, 1944, ch. 660, title I, 58 Stat. 856, which related to number of regular commissioned nurses to be appointed, their grades, and their length of service for purposes of pay and pay periods, was not repeated in subsequent appropriation acts.

Section 209b, act Dec. 22, 1944, ch. 660, title I, 58 Stat. 857, which authorized appointment of fifty additional regular commissioned officers of which twenty-four were to be in grades above that of senior assistant, was not repeated in subsequent appropriation acts.