alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 151.7 Policy terms consistent with the Act. ( a ) The insurance shall be construed in conformity with the Act. In particular, no effect shall be given to any policy terms which are inconsistent or in conflict with those provisions of the Act stating that any suit against the insurer under the policy shall not be subject to any of the following defenses: ( 1 ) That the insured is immune from suit;
( 2 ) That the insured is an indispensable party; or
( 3 ) In the absence of fraud or collusion, that the insured has violated a term of the contract, unless the contract was canceled before the claim arose.
( b ) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (a) of this section, the insured is expected to respond to reasonable requests from the insurer for cooperation.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4047 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4047

 To require solicitations for Federal procurement contracts to include 
  information about the applicability of Buy American law and whether 
foreign goods may be used to fulfill the requirements of the contracts.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 15, 2012

  Mr. Murphy of Connecticut introduced the following bill; which was 
      referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require solicitations for Federal procurement contracts to include 
  information about the applicability of Buy American law and whether 
foreign goods may be used to fulfill the requirements of the contracts.

    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 ``Full Disclosure in Federal 
Contracting Act''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT FOR INFORMATION ABOUT BUY AMERICAN LAW AND 
              ACCEPTABLE FOREIGN GOODS TO BE INCLUDED IN CERTAIN 
              FEDERAL CONTRACT SOLICITATIONS.

    (a) Requirement.--In any solicitation for a Federal contract for 
the procurement of goods, the Federal agency issuing the solicitation 
shall include the following information:
            (1) A statement of--
                    (A) whether chapter 83 of title 41, United States 
                Code (popularly known as the ``Buy American Act''), 
                applies or does not apply to the contract; and
                    (B) if such chapter 83 does not apply to the 
                contract, the reasons why such chapter does not apply, 
                including a description of any applicable exception or 
                waiver of such chapter and the law or regulation 
                providing such exception or waiver.
            (2) Whether such chapter 83 applies or does not apply--
                    (A) a statement of whether goods from foreign 
                countries would be acceptable as end products for 
                purposes of fulfilling the requirements of the 
                contract; and
                    (B) a list of all the foreign countries whose goods 
                would be acceptable as end products for such purposes.
    (b) Effective Date.--This Act shall apply to solicitations for 
contracts issued after the date occurring 180 days after the date of 
the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Re: ppm-hours data 

Vicki Sandiford to: Susan Stone 02/08/2010 01:03 PM

Cc: David Schonbrunn, David Mintz, Tricia Crabtree

Dear David Schhonbrunn,

Please see pages 3021 to 3026 in the January 19, 2010 Ozone Federal Register Notice available on the 

EPA Technology Transfer Network (TTN). The sections covered in these pages describe how the 

Administrator reached her proposed decision regarding an appropriate range of levels to consider in the 

context of the current reconsideration of the 2008 secondary standard. If you are unable to get access to 

the FRN, I would be happy to send you a file with the relevant pages included. Thank you for your 

interest.

Vicki Sandiford 

Victoria Sandiford

Environmental Scientist

Ambient Standards Group (C504-06)

Health and Environmental Impacts Division

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

109 TW Alexander Drive

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

sandiford.vicki@epa.gov

Phone: 919-541-2629

FAX: 919-541-0237

Susan Stone Dear David Schhonbrunn: By copy of this mess... 02/08/2010 11:56:06 AM

From: Susan Stone/RTP/USEPA/US

To: David Schonbrunn <David@Schonbrunn.org>

Cc: Tricia Crabtree/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, David Mintz/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Vicki 

Sandiford/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 02/08/2010 11:56 AM

Subject: Re: ppm-hours data

Dear David Schhonbrunn: By copy of this message, I am asking David Mintz to point you to any 

additional mapping information, other than the maps we had at the public hearing; and I'm asking Vicki 

Sandiford to point you to the location in the Federal Register notice where we discuss our rationale for the 

proposed range. David M. and Vicki, if you would please copy Tricia Crabtree on your responses so that 

we can ensure that communications are entered into the public docket. David Schonbrunn, I hope this 

information will be useful. Best regards, Susan 

Susan Lyon Stone

Ambient Standards Group l US EPA (C504-06) l Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Phone: 919-541-1146 l Fax: 919-541-0237 l HSD Phone 919-966-6226

David Schonbrunn Susan, I would appreciate being able to look at t... 02/04/2010 09:09:31 PM
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

PUBLIC MEETING ON TEST PROCEDURES FOR CONVENTIONAL

COOKING PRODUCTS

U.S. Department of Energy

1000 Independence Avenue, SW.

Washington, DC 20585

Monday, March 4, 201 3

9:00 am

– 11 : 15 a m ET, Room 8E

- 089

Purpose

The Department will present its proposed amendments to the conventional cooking

products test procedure, which would allow for testing products with induction cooking

technology . The Department also will seek input from stakeholders on its proposed

amendments

.

Agenda

9 :00

- 9 :15 a m Welcome, O pening Remarks, and Agenda Review

Doug Brookman

9 :15

- 9 :20 a m Regulatory History

9 :2 0

- 9: 30 am Covered Products

9:30

- 10:3 0 am Active Mode Test Procedure

10 : 30

- 10 : 45 a m Standby and Off Mode Test Procedure

10:45

- 11:00 am Compliance with EPCA Requirements

11: 00

- 1 1 : 15 a m Other Issues and Comments, Closing Remarks

1 1 : 15 a m Adjourn
§ 46.9 Voluntary supplemental reporting. ( a ) For purposes of this section, the term *voluntary, supplemental report* means any report of data for a pre-enactment or transition swap to a swap data repository that is not required to be made pursuant to this part or any other part in this chapter.
( b ) A voluntary, supplemental report for a pre-enactment or transition swap may be made only by a counterparty to the swap in connection with which the voluntary, supplemental report is made, or by a third-party service provider acting on behalf of a counterparty to the swap.
( c ) A voluntary, supplemental report for a pre-enactment or transition swap may be made only after the initial data report for the swap required by section 46.3(a) or the report required by section 46.3(b), as applicable, has been made.
( d ) A voluntary, supplemental report for a pre-enactment or transition swap may be made either to the swap data repository to which the initial data report for the swap required by section 46.3(a) or the report required by section 46.3(b), as applicable, has been made, or to a different swap data repository.
( e ) A voluntary, supplemental report for a pre-enactment or transition swap must contain: ( 1 ) An indication that the report is a voluntary, supplemental report.
( 2 ) The swap data repository identifier created for the swap by the automated systems of the swap data repository to which the initial data report required by section 46.3(a) or the report required by section 46.3(b), as applicable, has been made.
( 3 ) An indication of the identity of the swap data repository to which the initial data report required by section 46.3(a) or the report required by section 46.3(b), as applicable, has been made, if the voluntary supplemental report is made to a different swap data repository.
( 4 ) If the pre-enactment or transition swap was in existence on or after April 25, 2011, the legal entity identifier (or substitute identifier) of the counterparty making the voluntary, supplemental report.
( 5 ) If applicable, an indication that the voluntary, supplemental report is made pursuant to the laws or regulations of any jurisdiction outside the United States.
( f ) If a counterparty that has made a voluntary, supplemental report discovers any errors in the data for a pre-enactment or a transition swap included in the voluntary, supplemental report, the counterparty must report a correction of each such error to the swap data repository to which the voluntary, supplemental report was made, as soon as technologically practicable after discovery of any such error.
[77 FR 35226, June 12, 2012, as amended at 85 FR 75594, Nov. 25, 2020]
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The
undersigned, the Chief Executive Officer and the Vice President and Cashier of Communitycorp (the Company), each certify that, to his or her knowledge on the date of this certification:



| | 1. | The quarterly report of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                   |  |     |  |                                      
|------------------ |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: May 11, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ W. Roger Crook                   
|                   |  |     |  | W. Roger Crook                       
|                   |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer



|                   |  |     |  |                           
|------------------ |  | --- |  | --------------------------
|Date: May 11, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ Gwendolyn P. Bunton   
|                   |  |     |  | Gwendolyn P. Bunton       
|                   |  |     |  | Vice President and Cashier
In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

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

RAMONA MARY MESTAS, * No. 14-800V

*

Petitioner, * Special Master Moran

*

v. * Filed: September 29, 2015

*

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Stipulation; influenza vaccine;

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Guillain-Barré Syndrome (“GBS”).

* 

Respondent. *

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

Stephen I. Leshner, P.C., Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner;

Camille Collett, United States Dep’t of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

UNPUBLISHED DECISION1

On September 4, 2015, respondent filed a joint stipulation concerning the 

petition for compensation filed by Ramona Mary Mestas on September 2, 2014. In 

her petition, Ms. Mestas alleged that the influenza vaccine, which is contained in 

the Vaccine Injury Table (the “Table”), 42 C.F.R. §100.3(a), and which she

received on August 31, 2011, caused her to develop Guillain-Barré syndrome 

(“GBS”). Petitioner further alleges that she experienced the residual effects of this 

condition for more than six months. Petitioner represents that there has been no 

prior award or settlement of a civil action for damages as a result of her condition.

Respondent denies that the influenza immunization is the cause of 

petitioner’s alleged GBS or any other injury or condition.

 

1 The E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (Dec. 17, 

2002), requires that the Court post this decision on its website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b), 

the party has 14 days to file a motion proposing redaction of medical information or other 

information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4). Any redactions ordered by the special 

master will appear in the document posted on the website.
2

Nevertheless, the parties agree to the joint stipulation, attached hereto as 

“Appendix A.” The undersigned finds said stipulation to be reasonable and adopts 

it as the decision of the Court in awarding damages, on the terms set forth therein.

Damages awarded in that stipulation include:

A lump sum of $25,000.00 in the form of a check payable to petitioner, 

Ramona Mary Mestas. This amount represents compensation for all 

damages that would be available under 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-15(a).

In the absence of a motion for review filed pursuant to RCFC, Appendix B, 

the clerk is directed to enter judgment in case 14-800V according to this decision 

and the attached stipulation.2

Any questions may be directed to my law clerk, Dan Hoffman, at (202) 357-

6360.

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master

 

2 Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 11(a), the parties can expedite entry of judgment by each 

party filing a notice renouncing the right to seek review by a United States Court of Federal 

Claims judge.
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.

§ 240.10b-5 Employment of manipulative and deceptive devices. It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities exchange, ( a ) To employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud,
( b ) To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or
( c ) To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person,
in connection with the purchase or sale of any security. (Sec. 10; 48 Stat. 891; 15 U.S.C. 78j)
[13 FR 8183, Dec. 22, 1948, as amended at 16 FR 7928, Aug. 11, 1951]
#### H. Laskey, Defendant in Error, v. Samuel Mendelson and Benjamin Mendelson, trading as Mendelson Brothers, Plaintiffs in Error.

Gen. No. 20,590.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph S. La Buy, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1914.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed March 8, 1915.

Statement of the Case.

Action by H. Laskey, plaintiff, against Samuel Mendelson and Benjamin Mendelson, trading as Mendel-son Brothers, defendants, to recover the purchase price of goods alleged to have been sold defendants.

Defendants’ offer of evidence tending to show that the goods had been sold to other than defendants was objected to by plaintiff on the ground that the affidavit of defense contained nothing concerning a sale to another than defendants and the objection" was sustained.

■Judgment was rendered for plaintiff and to reverse the judgment, defendants prosecute this writ of error.

*598Abstract of the Decision.

Pleading, § *28*
      ***
      *—when statement of evidence in affidavit of defense not required.*In an action for the purchase price of goods alleged to have been sold, it is error to refuse to permit defendants to introduce testimony tending to show that the goods were sold to another than defendants, even though the affidavit of defense did not set up the sale to other than defendants.

Moses, Rosenthal & Kennedy, for plaintiffs in error; Julius Moses and Sigmund W. David, of counsel.

Isadore S. Blumenthal, for defendant in error.

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, «w»« topic and section number.

Mr. Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.
### §15451. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 15451 was editorially reclassified as section 21051 of Title 52, Voting and Elections.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4128 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4128

To recognize a primary measure of national unemployment for purposes of 
                        the Federal Government.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 1, 2012

 Mr. Hunter (for himself, Mr. Stutzman, Mr. Kinzinger of Illinois, Mr. 
Denham, Mr. Palazzo, Mr. Rooney, Mr. Quayle, Mr. Guthrie, Mr. Franks of 
Arizona, Mr. Grimm, Mr. Issa, Mr. Pitts, Mrs. Bachmann, Mrs. Blackburn, 
  Mr. Broun of Georgia, Mr. Mulvaney, Mr. Walsh of Illinois, and Mr. 
   Bilbray) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To recognize a primary measure of national unemployment for purposes of 
                        the Federal Government.

    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 ``Real Unemployment Calculation Act''.

SEC. 2. PRIMARY MEASURE OF UNEMPLOYMENT.

    The measure of unemployment issued by the Bureau of Labor 
Statistics known as U5 shall be treated by the Bureau as the official 
unemployment rate and shall be considered by the Federal Government as 
the primary measure of unemployment in the United States.
                                 <all>
```
#### SEELAV et al. v. McKENZIE.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

February 23, 1905.)

Pleading—Action on Contract—Sufficiency op Answer.

In an action for the price of “goods, wares, and merchandise" sold' and delivered, an answer alleging" a contract for the purchase of lumber' ’from plaintiff, and a breach thereof by failure to deliver some of the-kinds ordered, without connecting this contract with the contract sued on, is subject to demurrer.

*351Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.

Action by Max Seelav and another against William U. McKenzie. From an interlocutory judgment overruling a demurrer to a separate defense for insufficiency, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed.

Argued before SCOTT, GIEGERICH, and McCALL, JJ.

Herman B. Goodstein, for appellants.

Theodore H. Friend, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The complaint alleges the sale and delivery of “goods, wares, and merchandise” on or about the 10th day of September, 1904. The separate defense demurred to alleges a contract made on August 5, 1904, whereby the plaintiffs sold and agreed to deliver to the defendant several quantities of lumber of various sorts, and that on September 10, 1904, the defendant received from the plaintiffs a quantity of lumber, largely in excess of the amount ordered in some sizes, and lacking in other sizes; also that the defendant has accepted and paid for such portions of the shipment as were covered by and conformed to the contract, and rejected the balance; and that on its receipt such payment was accepted by the plaintiffs in full satisfaction and discharge under such agreement.

There is not a word to connect the goods, wares, and merchandise mentioned in the complaint with the lumber mentioned in the separate defense, except the coincidence of date, to wit, September 10, 1904. This, we think, is wholly insufficient, even under the most liberal application of the rule invoked by the appellant that a pleading should be literally construed. There must be something to show that the complaint and the answer relate to the same contract. Ivy Courts Realty Co. v. Morton, 73 App. Div. 335, 76 N. Y. Supp. 687.

The interlocutory judgment should be reversed, with costs to the appellant, and the demurrer sustained, with costs, with leave to the defendant to plead over upon payment of such costs within six days.
Summary of Compensation and Benefit Arrangements for Non-Employee Directors



 Exhibit 10.25 
  
 OMNOVA SOLUTIONS INC. 
  
 COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS FOR NONEMPLOYEE DIRECTORS 
 EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2006 
  
 Retainer 
  
 Each nonemployee director is entitled to an annual retainer of $47,000, of which $35,000 shall be paid in cash and the remaining
$12,000 shall be paid in restricted shares of OMNOVA Solutions Inc. The number of restricted shares to be awarded will be determined based on the closing price per share of the Company’s common stock on the date of the Company’s Annual
Meeting of Shareholders. The restricted shares will vest three years following the issue date and shall be subject to such other terms and conditions as shall be approved by the Board of Directors and in accordance with the OMNOVA Solutions Inc.
Amended and Restated 1999 Equity and Performance Incentive Plan. 
  
 Chairmanship Fee 
  
 Each Committee Chairman is entitled to
an annual Chairman’s fee of $5,000. 
  
 Expenses 
  
 Travel expenses incurred in attending Board and Committee meetings are reimbursed by
the Company upon receipt of Expense Report forms and backup documentation. 
  
 Benefits 
  
 Deferred Compensation Plan for Nonemployee Directors

  
 A nonemployee director may elect prior to December 31 of a
calendar year to defer receipt of all or a portion of his director’s fees earned during the succeeding calendar year. Investment choices under the Plan are a phantom OMNOVA Solutions Common Stock fund, an equity fund which tracks the
Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, and an interest income fund which tracks the prime rate payable by the Company. Various distribution options are available. The plan is unfunded and is not governed by ERISA. 







 Directors’ Retirement Plan 
  
 Effective February 2, 2000, the OMNOVA Retirement Plan for Nonemployee Directors was discontinued with respect to all new nonemployee directors. At the same
time, the plan was “frozen” with respect to certain continuing directors who elected to keep their benefits under the plan accrued to that date but discontinue participation going forward. Effective December 31, 2005, the plan was
“frozen” with respect to all remaining directors who had continued to accrue benefits under the plan to that date and, thereafter, there will be no further accruals of benefits under the plan.