alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §2163. Access to Restricted Data

The Commission may authorize any of its employees, or employees of any contractor, prospective contractor, licensee or prospective licensee of the Commission or any other person authorized access to Restricted Data by the Commission under section 2165(b) and (c) of this title to permit any employee of an agency of the Department of Defense or of its contractors, or any member of the Armed Forces to have access to Restricted Data required in the performance of his duties and so certified by the head of the appropriate agency of the Department of Defense or his designee: Provided, however, That the head of the appropriate agency of the Department of Defense or his designee has determined, in accordance with the established personnel security procedures and standards of such agency, that permitting the member or employee to have access to such Restricted Data will not endanger the common defense and security: And provided further, That the Secretary of Defense finds that the established personnel and other security procedures and standards of such agency are adequate and in reasonable conformity to the standards established by the Commission under section 2165 of this title.

(Aug. 1, 1946, ch. 724, title I, §143, as added Aug. 30, 1954, ch. 1073, §1, 68 Stat. 941; amended Aug. 6, 1956, ch. 1015, §14, 70 Stat. 1071; Pub. L. 87–206, §5, Sept. 6, 1961, 75 Stat. 476; renumbered title I, Pub. L. 102–486, title IX, §902(a)(8), Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 2944.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1961—Pub. L. 87–206 inserted reference to subsection (c) of section 2165 of this title.

1956—Act Aug. 6, 1956, inserted "or any other person authorized access to Restricted Data by the Commission under section 2165(b) of this title".
### §286b. Repealed. Pub. L. 103–43, title XIV, §1402(b), June 10, 1993, 107 Stat. 171

Section, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IV, §469, as added Nov. 20, 1985, Pub. L. 99–158, §2, 99 Stat. 860; amended Nov. 4, 1988, Pub. L. 100–607, title I, §146(a), 102 Stat. 3058, authorized appropriations for grants and contracts under sections 286b–3 through 286b–7 of this title.
### §2189. Federally financed research

Nothing in this chapter shall affect the right of the Commission to require that patents granted on inventions, made or conceived during the course of federally financed research or operations, be assigned to the United States.

(Aug. 1, 1946, ch. 724, title I, §159, as added Aug. 30, 1954, ch. 1073, §1, 68 Stat. 948; renumbered title I, Pub. L. 102–486, title IX, §902(a)(8), Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 2944.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning act Aug. 1, 1946, ch. 724, as added by act Aug. 30, 1954, ch. 1073, §1, 68 Stat. 919, known as the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2011 of this title and Tables.
WILLIAM NATHANIEL 

TAYLOR, JR.,

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. 1D13-5379

_____________________________/

Opinion filed September 4, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Ross Goodman, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public 

Defender, Tallahassee; and William Nathaniel Taylor, Jr., pro se, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Angela R. Hensel, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to our recent decision in Taylor v. State, 140 So. 3d 1149 (Fla. 1st 

DCA 2014), the conviction for which the appellant was sentenced to probation was 

reversed and the matter remanded for a new trial. Accordingly, the judgment and 
sentence being appealed herein, which was imposed upon revocation of probation, 

is REVERSED.

ROBERTS, MARSTILLER, and SWANSON, JJ., CONCUR.

2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ernest W. Edwards, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Otsego County Court, rendered December 9,1976, convicting defendant on his plea of guilty of the crime of burglary in the third degree. Defendant, represented by retained counsel, pleaded guilty in satisfaction of the indictments pending against him. The court stated the factual basis of the charges and that a plea of guilty was equivalent to a jury verdict convicting him of the charges. The defendant was also told what sentence would be imposed upon a guilty plea, and such sentence was in fact imposed. The defendant’s contentions that he was mentally incompetent to plead, that his legal counsel was inadequate, that a sentencing promise made to him by his retained counsel was broken, are totally without support in the record other than the defendant’s self-serving letters written after his plea. The judgment must be affirmed (cf. *People v Selikoff,*35 NY2d 227, 241-242; *People v Hayes,*55 AD2d 691). Judgment affirmed. Koreman, P. J., Kane, Mahoney, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1157

CISA Y. RILEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM HENDERSON, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-00-901) Submitted: June 29, 2001 Decided: July 27, 2001 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cisa Y. Riley, Appellant Pro Se. Leslie Bonner McClendon, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* To the extent Riley claims the district court’s order of summary judgment prevented her from completing discovery, because Riley failed to seek a continuance under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f), she cannot raise this claim on appeal. See Evans v. Technologies Applications & Serv. Co. , 80 F.3d 954, 961 (4th Cir. 1996). Additionally, in light of the nature of the district court’s dismissalof Riley’s claim, her assertion that the affirmative defense recognized by Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998), is inapplicable in her action is moot. 2 PER CURIAM: Cisa Y. Riley appeals the district court’s order dismissing her claims of racial discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. * See Riley v. Henderson , No. CA-00-901 (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 4, 2001, entered Jan. 9, 2001). 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
#### § 1102.10 Examination of records.

When a request to examine records is approved by the FOIA Officer, every reasonable effort will be made to provide facilities for the purpose of such examination. “On the spot” copying will be available if the FOIA Officer decides there will be no interference with ordinary activities or routine business of the section.
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeals of

-- ) ) Centerra Group, LLC f/k/a The Wackenhut )

Services, Inc. ) ) Under ContractNo. NNA06CD65C ) APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT:

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA Nos. 61267, 61772

Karen L. Manos, Esq. Erin N. Rankin, Esq.

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Washington, DC Scott W. Barber, Esq.

NASA ChiefTrial Attorney Daniel C. Hymer, Esq.

Trial Attorney NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA OPINION BYADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE WOODROW It is the Board's decision, pursuantto 41 U.S.C. §§ 7105(e), 7108(b), and the parties' settlement oftheir dispute and September 16, 2019 Joint Request for Entry of Consent Judgment, that these appeals and Respondent's Counterclaim are sustained. In the nature ofa consentjudgment, the Board makes a monetary award in the amount of$3,000,000.00. This amount is inclusive ofinterest. No further interest shall be paid. Dated: September 23, 2019

(Signatures continued) Administrative Judge Armed Services Board ofContractAppealsI concur



### J 0\dministr tive Judge Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals I concur 

# v___ OWEN C. WILSON Administrative Judge Vice Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Opinion and Decision ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 61267, 61772, Appeals of Centerra Group, LLC f/k/a The Wackenhut Services, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

2 PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
EX-31.1 Certification
Pursuant to Section 302

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER

I, James E. Jenkins, certify
that:

1.    
          I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for TS&B Holdings, Inc.

2.    
          Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
          report.

3.    
          Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
          included in this Quarterly 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 quarterly report.

4.    
          The registrants officers and I am responsible for establishing and
          maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
          13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and the company has:

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 Quarterly Report is being prepared;

b)       
          evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
          procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
          Quarterly Report (the Evaluation Date); and

c)       
          presented in this Quarterly Report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
          the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
          Evaluation Date;

5.    
          The registrant officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
          evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of
          registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
          function):

a)       
          all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
          which could adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
          summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
          registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b)       
          any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
          who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls; and

Date: May 20, 2004

/s/ James E. JenkinsJames E. Jenkins, President
and Chief Executive Officer
### §285d–2. Research and training

The Director of the Institute shall—

(1) carry out programs of support for research and training (other than training for which Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards may be made under section 288 of this title) in the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of arthritis and musculoskeletal and skin diseases, including support for training in medical schools, graduate clinical training, graduate training in epidemiology, epidemiology studies, clinical trials, and interdisciplinary research programs; and

(2) establish programs of evaluation, planning, and dissemination of knowledge related to such research and training.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IV, §437, as added Pub. L. 99–158, §2, Nov. 20, 1985, 99 Stat. 849; amended Pub. L. 107–206, title I, §804(c), Aug. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 874.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2002—Par. (1). Pub. L. 107–206 substituted "Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards" for "National Research Service Awards".
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report ofMarkWest Hydrocarbon, Inc. (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for the periodending June  30, 2006, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, JamesG. Ivey, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of myknowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ JAMES G. IVEY       |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
|                    |
| James G. Ivey           |
| Chief Financial Officer |
|                    |
| August 7, 2006          |

 

----
Editorial Note on Part 143
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 143 appear at 68 FR 51360, Aug. 26, 2003.

§ 143.23 Self-evaluation. ( a ) Each recipient employing the equivalent of 15 or more full-time employees shall complete a one-time written self-evaluation of its compliance under the Act within 18 months of the effective date of these regulations.
( b ) In its self-evaluation each recipient shall identify each age distinction it uses and justify each age distinction it imposes on the program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance from an agency.
( c ) Each recipient shall take corrective action whenever a self-evaluation indicates a violation of these regulations.
( d ) Each recipient shall make the self-evaluation available on request to the agency and to the public for a period of three years following its completion.
#### George Carlton Comstock, Appellant, v. Waitt Investing Company, Inc., Respondent.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present —■ Clarke, P. J., Laughlin, Dowling, Page and Merrell, JJ.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ALBERTO R. ALGABA,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-1302

[July 16, 2020]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Ernest Kollra, Judge; 

L.T. Case No.12-13378CF10A.

Alberto R. Algaba, Milton, pro se.

No appearance filed for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DAMOORGIAN, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
# 3.905-2           Enforcement of orders.       

(a)                   Whenever a contractor or *subcontractor* fails to comply with an order issued under 3.905–1(a)(2), the *head of the agency* concerned *shall* file an action for enforcement of the order in the U.S. district court for a district in which the reprisal was found to have occurred. In any action brought pursuant to this authority, the court *may* grant appropriate relief, including injunctive relief, compensatory and exemplary damages, and attorney fees and costs. The complainant employee upon whose behalf an order was issued *may* also file such an action or join in an action filed by the *head of the agency*.                

(b)                   Any person adversely affected or aggrieved by an order issued under 3.905–1(a)(2) *may* obtain review of the order's conformance with 41 U.S.C. 4712 and its implementing regulations, in the U.S. court of appeals for a circuit in which the reprisal is alleged in the order to have occurred. No petition seeking such review *may* be filed more than 60 days after issuance of the order by the *head of the agency*. Filing such an appeal *shall* not act to stay the enforcement of the order of the head of an agency, unless a stay is specifically entered by the court.                

**Parent topic:**3.905 Remedies and enforcement of orders.
Cement Manufacturing Process Flow Diagram

Sites Controlled by Others

Processing Raw 

Materials

Raw Material 

Loading

Wastewater 

Treatment 

Sludge Storage

B

Processing Raw Materials

- Primary and Secondary 

Crushing

-Screening

-- Raw mill feed belt

-- Raw mill weigh hopper

-- Raw mill air separator

Wastewater 

Treatment 

Sludge 

Unloading

A 438,000 kg/year

C

Raw Material 

Preparation 

(Proportioning 

and Grinding)

D

Slurry Mixing 

and Blending

E

Rotary Kiln

F

Clinker Cooler

G

H Clinker Storage

Finish Grinding 

Mill

J

Product Storage

K

Shipment

L

Air Separator

I

Gypsum

1

Raw Materials

330,000 kg/hr or 

2,300,000,000 kg/year 

(estimated)

0.05 kg/day

Baghouse

5.4 kg/day
§ 120.36 Significant military equipment. ( a ) *Significant military equipment* means articles for which special export controls are warranted because of their capacity for substantial military utility or capability.
( b ) Significant military equipment includes: ( 1 ) Items in § 121.1 of this subchapter that are preceded by an asterisk; and
( 2 ) All classified articles enumerated in § 121.1 of this subchapter.
###### Editorial Note on Part 249

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 249 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

#### § 249.11 Form R31 for reporting covered sales and covered round turn transactions under section 31 of the Act.

This form shall be used by each national securities exchange to report to the Commission within ten business days after the end of every month the aggregate dollar amount of sales of securities that occurred on the exchange, had a charge date in the month of the report, and are subject to fees pursuant to section 31(b) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78ee) and § 240.31 of this chapter; and the total number of round turn transactions in security futures that occurred on the exchange, had a charge date in the month of the report, and are subject to assessments pursuant to section 31(d) of the Act and § 240.31 of this chapter. This form also shall be used by a national securities association to report to the Commission within ten business days after the end of every month the aggregate dollar amount of sales of securities that occurred by or through a member of the association otherwise than on a national securities exchange, had a charge date in the month of the report, and are subject to fees pursuant to section 31(c) of the Act and § 240.31 of this chapter; and the total number of round turn transactions in security futures that occurred by or through any member of the association otherwise than on a national securities exchange, had a charge date in the month of the report, and are subject to assessments pursuant to section 31(d) of the Act and § 240.31 of this chapter.

[69 FR 41080, July 7, 2004]

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations affecting Form R31, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*
#### Vasilios Tsolson et al., Appellants, v. Ernest Weinfeld et al., Respondents.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, Anna Tsolson, as a passenger in an automobile owned by the defendant, Ernest Weinfeld and. operated by defendant Elizabeth Weinfeld, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated February 11, 1960, denying their motion to strike out defendants’ answer and for summary judgment, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldoek, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.
§ 230.429 Prospectus relating to several registration statements. ( a ) Where a registrant has filed two or more registration statements, it may file a single prospectus in the latest registration statement in order to satisfy the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder for that offering and any other offering(s) registered on the earlier registration statement(s). The combined prospectus in the latest registration statement must include all of the information that currently would be required in a prospectus relating to all offering(s) that it covers. The combined prospectus may be filed as part of the initial filing of the latest registration statement, in a pre-effective amendment to it or in a post-effective amendment to it.
( b ) Where a registrant relies on paragraph (a) of this section, the registration statement containing the combined prospectus shall act, upon effectiveness, as a post-effective amendment to any earlier registration statement whose prospectus has been combined in the latest registration statement. The registrant must identify any earlier registration statement to which the combined prospectus relates by setting forth the Commission file number at the bottom of the facing page of the latest registration statement.
[66 FR 8896, Feb. 5, 2001]
§ 1508.420 May I approve a transaction with an excluded or disqualified person at a lower tier? If a transaction at a lower tier is subject to your approval, you as an agency official may not approve— ( a ) A covered transaction with a person who is currently excluded, unless you obtain an exception under § 1508.120; or
( b ) A transaction with a person who is disqualified from that transaction, unless you obtain a waiver or exception under the statute, Executive order, or regulation that is the basis for the person's disqualification.