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

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0165

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

BRUCE SCHRODER,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 60-day extension of time, and

good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to and

including August 5, 2023, within which to prepare, serve, and file its response 

brief. 

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 26 2023

05/26/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0165
1845-0039 – Affected Public – Public Institutions 3/17/2015

Institutions are required to report student Pell Grant payment information to ED electronically. 

Electronic reporting is conducted through the Common Origination and Disbursement (COD) 

system. The COD system is used by institutions to request, report, and reconcile grant funds 

received from the Pell Grant program. 

ED uses the information collected in the COD system to aid in ensuring compliance with fiscal 

and administrative requirements under the HEA for the Pell Grant program and under 34 CFR 

690 for the Pell Grant program regulations.

The minimum reporting requirement is one record for origination and disbursement data per 

student, per grant award, per award year. Institutions may correct an accepted COD record as 

many times as they wish, but are not required to submit changes unless the student’s award 

amount changes from the accepted origination amount originally established in COD.

For the 2014-2015 award year, the projected number of FAFSA completers is expected to be 

reduced by 2.86%. Based on the 8,738,722 unduplicated student recipients for the Federal Pell 

Grant program for 2013-2014, the number of unduplicated Federal Pell Grant recipients for 

2014-2015 is estimated to be 8,488,843 multiplied by .07 hours per recipient for all institutions

to enter data in the COD system for a total of 594,219 burden hours. 

1,879 Public institutions 

5,687,525 responses X .07 hours = 398,127 burden hours
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-16-0034:  Monitoring Neutron Absorbing Materials in Spent Fuel Pools.

Accession Number: ML15159B163

Date Released: Monday, April 4, 2016

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML15153A075 - SECY-16-0034:  Issuance of Generic Letter 2016-xx, "Monitoring of Neutron Absorbing Materials in Spent Fuel Pools". (7 page(s), 3/16/2016)
    - ML16049A374 - SECY-16-0034:  Final Generic Letter 2016-xx, "Monitoring of Neutron-Absorbing Materials in Spent Fuel Pools", Rev. 2 - Encl. 1. (20 page(s), 2/16/2016)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Election Assistance Commission

# AGENCY:

United States Election Assistance Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting agenda (amended).

# DATES AND TIME:

Tuesday, December 14, 2004, 10 a.m.-12 noon.

# PLACE:

U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 1225 New York Ave., NW., Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20005, (Metro Stop: Metro Center).

# AGENDA:

The Commission will receive updates and reports on the following: Title II Requirements Payments; Budget Update; EAC's 2005 HAVA Implementation Action Plan including specific discussion on the Development and Establishment of Statewide Voter Registration Databases; Other Programmatic Updates and Administrative Matters.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bryan Whitener, Telephone: (202) 566-3100.

DeForest B. Soaries, Jr.,

Chairman, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

[FR Doc. 04-27247 Filed 12-8-04; 11:00 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-YN-M
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Johnny Mason, Appellant.

[717 NYS2d 130]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Micki Scherer, J.), rendered September 23, 1998, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a persistent felony, offender, to a term of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion when it adjudicated defendant a persistent felony offender and sentenced him accordingly. Defendant’s extensive criminal history included seven felony convictions and fifteen misdemeanor convictions in New York, as well as out-of-State convictions. Although the instant conviction and the prior convictions were not for crimes of violence, defendant exhibited a pattern of preying on elderly, vulnerable victims. Defendant’s conduct required a lengthy prison sentence because every time he was sentenced to prison and paroled, he immediately again engaged in criminal conduct. Defendant’s sentence was not disproportionate to those received by his codefendants. Although the codefendants were also multiple felony offenders, their records were less serious than that of defendant. Defendant’s sentence is not unconstitutional *(see, Rummel v Estelle,*445 US 263; *People v Thompson,*83 NY2d 477). There is nothing anomalous about the fact that a persistent felony offender, in certain situations, is subject to a higher minimum sentence than a persistent violent felony offender. A persistent violent felony sentence is based entirely on the fact of the prior convictions, whereas a persistent felony sentence requires additional findings *(see,*Penal Law § 70.10 [2]; CPL 400.20). In this case, the court properly found that defendant, in addition to having multiple felony convictions, was incorrigible. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Ellerin, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4307 

To prohibit the Ambassador’s Fund for Cultural Preservation from making 

grants, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2012 

Mr. LANKFORD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Ambassador’s Fund for Cultural Preservation 

from making grants, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION. 

4 No funds made available to the Department of State 

5 or any department or agency may be used to carry out 

6 the Ambassador’s Fund for Cultural Preservation or any 

7 other such program to provide grants for cultural preser8 vation outside the United States. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 242 (Friday, December 17, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 75561]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-27592]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CA-310-0777-XG]


Notice of Public Meeting: Northwest California Resource Advisory 
Council

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act 
of 1976 (FLPMA), and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), 
the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 
Northwest California Resource Advisory Council will meet as indicated 
below.

DATES: The meeting will be held Wednesday and Thursday, Feb. 2 and 3, 
2005, in Redding, California. On Feb. 2, the council members convene at 
10 a.m. at the BLM Redding Field Office, 355 Hemsted Dr., and depart 
immediately for a field tour of projected land exchange sites. Members 
of the public are welcome on the tour, but they must provide their own 
transportation and lunch. On Feb. 3, the council convenes at 8 a.m. in 
the Conference Center at the McConnell Foundation headquarters, 800 
Shasta View Drive in Redding. Time for public comment has been set 
aside for 10:30 a.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rich Burns, BLM Ukiah Field Office 
manager, (707) 468-4000; or BLM Public Affairs Officer Joseph J. 
Fontana, (530) 252-5332.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 12-member council advises the Secretary 
of the Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of planning and 
management issues associated with public land management in Northwest 
California. At this meeting, agenda topics will include the proposed 
``Area 51'' land exchange, other land exchange issues, transportation 
funding and recreation issues. All meetings are open to the public. 
Members of the public may present written comments to the council. Each 
formal council meeting will have time allocated for public comments. 
Depending on the number of persons wishing to speak, and the time 
available, the time for individual comments may be limited. Members of 
the public are welcome on field tours, but they must provide their own 
transportation and lunch. Individuals who plan to attend and need 
special assistance, such as sign language interpretation and other 
reasonable accommodations, should contact the BLM as provided above.

    Dated: December 10, 2004.
Joseph J. Fontana,
Public Affairs Officer.
[FR Doc. 04-27592 Filed 12-16-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-40-P
EXHIBIT 32.2





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


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








(1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2)           Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:  August
13, 2012


/s/ George MorrisGeorge MorrisChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Internet Infinity, Inc. and will be retained by Internet Infinity, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 40.8 Availability of public information. ( a ) The following sections of all applications to become a designated contract market, swap execution facility, derivatives clearing organization, or swap data repository shall be made publicly available: Transmittal letter and first page of the application cover sheet, proposed rules, narrative summary of the applicant's proposed activities and regulatory compliance chart, documents establishing the applicant's legal status, documents setting forth the applicant's corporate and governance structure and any other part of the application not covered by a request for confidential treatment.
( b ) [Reserved]
( c ) A registered entity's filing of new products pursuant to the self-certification procedures of § 40.2 of this part, new products for Commission review and approval pursuant to § 40.3 of this part, new rules and rule amendments for Commission review and approval pursuant to § 40.4 or § 40.5 of this part, and new rules and rule amendments pursuant to the self-certification procedures of § 40.6 and § 40.10 of this part shall be treated as public information unless accompanied by a request for confidential treatment. If a registered entity files a request for confidential treatment, the following procedures shall apply: ( 1 ) A detailed written justification of the confidential treatment request must be filed simultaneously with the request for confidential treatment. The form and content of the detailed written justification shall be governed by § 145.9 of this chapter;
( 2 ) All material for which confidential treatment is requested must be segregated in an appendix to the submission;
( 3 ) The submission itself must indicate that material has been segregated and, as appropriate, an additional redacted version provided;
( 4 ) Commission staff may make an initial determination with respect to the request for confidential treatment without regard to whether a request for the information has been sought under the Freedom of Information Act;
( 5 ) All requests for confidential treatment shall be subject to the process provided by § 145.9 of this chapter.
( 6 ) A submitter of information under this part may appeal an adverse decision by staff to the Commission's Office of General Counsel. The form and content of such appeal shall be governed by § 145.9(g) of this chapter.
( 7 ) The grant of any part of a request for confidential treatment under this section may be reconsidered if a subsequent request under the Freedom of Information Act is made for the information.
( d ) Commission staff will not consider confidential treatment requests for information that is required to be made public under the Act. The terms and conditions of a product submitted to the Commission pursuant to §§ 40.2, 40.3, 40.5 and 40.6 of this part shall be made publicly available at the time of submission.
[76 FR 44790, July 27, 2011, as amended at 80 FR 59578, Oct. 2, 2015]
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MonsterWorldwide, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarterended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Charles Baker, Chief Financial Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)   The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
|        | By:    | /s/ CHARLES  BAKER                                        |   |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Charles Baker  Chief Financial Officer  May 10, 2006 |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, orotherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within theelectronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, hasbeen provided to Monster Worldwide, Inc. and will be retained by MonsterWorldwide, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.

----
#### Ruth E. Busk, Appellant, v. Charles W. Busk, Respondent.

Motion by appellant for a stay, pending appeal, denied. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
#### § 224.36 Post-hearing briefs.

The ALJ may require the parties to file post-hearing briefs. In any event, any party may file a post-hearing brief. The ALJ shall fix the time for filing briefs, at a time not exceeding 60 days from the date the parties receive the transcript of the hearing or, if applicable, the stipulated record. Such briefs may be accompanied by proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. The ALJ may permit the parties to file reply briefs.
§ 302.106 Administrative expenses of SIPC. ( a ) In carrying out its responsibilities, SIPC, as trustee for a covered broker or dealer, may utilize the services of third parties, including private attorneys, accountants, consultants, advisors, outside experts, and other third party professionals. SIPC shall have an allowed claim for administrative expenses for any amounts paid by SIPC for such services to the extent that such services are available in the private sector, and utilization of such services is practicable, efficient, and cost effective. The term *administrative expenses of SIPC* includes the costs and expenses of such attorneys, accountants, consultants, advisors, outside experts, and other third party professionals, and other expenses that would be allowable to a third party trustee under 15 U.S.C. 78eee(b)(5)(A), including the costs and expenses of SIPC employees that would be allowable pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 78fff(e).
( b ) The term *administrative expenses of SIPC* shall not include advances from SIPC to satisfy customer claims for net equity.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Robert Forsythe, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[716 NYS2d 616]

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 10, 1999, which, *inter alia,*ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.

Claimant was employed as a seasonal union carpenter and applied for unemployment insurance benefits during the time in which he was unemployed. In the meantime, claimant formed his own business as a general contractor building custom homes. The record reveals that claimant wrote various checks on behalf of this business, met with clients and periodically received payments for his work. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board held that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed and made willful false statements in order to obtain benefits.

We note that the question of total unemployment is a factual issue for the Board to resolve *(see, Matter of Deyneka [Commissioner of Labor],*272 AD2d 723). In our view, substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that claimant was not totally unemployed *(see, Matter of Kingsley-Agurkis [Commissioner of Labor],*273 AD2d 597), as well as the separate finding of willful misrepresentation *(see, Matter of Martz [Commissioner of Labor],*273 AD2d 578).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Carpinello, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
#### Charles L. d’Espinay, Respondent, v. Thomas B. Gilchrist, as Ancillary Executor of Jean F. d’Espinay, Deceased, Appellant.

While motions to strike matter from a pleading under rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice are not generally regarded with favor by the court, the allegations in the complaint in this action relating to the residence of the parties has no possible relevancy to the motion and should not be drawn into issue. The evidentiary matter objected to has no apparent necessary connection with the action and requiring defendant to plead thereto might likewise put in issue matter which is objectionable. We do not mean to indicate one way or the other as to whether the evidence with respect to the cheeks should be admitted. That can await the showing at the trial. The plaintiff cannot be prejudiced by striking the matter from the pleading, and the defendant may be saved prejudice thereby. Order unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motion granted. Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Cohn, Callahan and Breitel, JJ.
First Department,

February, 1978

(February 2, 1978)

#### In the Matter of Campus Products Co., Inc., Appellant, v Tax Commission of the City of New York, Respondent.

Final judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on or about April 5, 1976, which confirmed the tax assessments for the five-year period 1971/1972 through 1975/1976, unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts, by fixing the assessed valuation of the real property at $270,000, for each of the five years, and, as modified, judgment otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. In assessing this real property for the five-year period under discussion, it is necessary to consider all relevant factors affecting value. In this particular proceeding, it should be emphasized that the petitioner bought this property for $229,103 in 1965. Adjusting for inflation, the declining socio-economic condition in the South Bronx, the age of the buildings involved, their amenities and all other relevant indicia, we find that this record does not sustain an assessed valuation over $270,000 for any of the five years in question. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Lupiano and Silverman, JJ.
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Daniels, Nia (FAA)

Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 3:28 PM

To: 'president@cinedrones.net'

Cc: Pappas, Rob (FAA); Pearson, Lakisha (FAA)

Subject: Request for Additional Information

Dear Mr. Fortin: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket No. FAA2014-0798). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration to process your 

petition. Please submit the additional information to your docket at www.regulations.gov and submit any 

proprietary information to the FAA Headquarters or electronically via e-mail to nia.daniels@faa.gov. 

 Describe the aircraft make and model for the proposed UAS operation. The description should include 

the following: size and maximum weight (include payload) and whether the aircraft is fixed wing or 

rotorcraft. 

 List the aircraft’s cruise speed. 

 Provide information regarding the radio frequency spectrum. This information can be located in the 

aircraft manual. 

 Describe the proximity of the proposed operations to airports and populated areas. 

 Your petition refers to the Flight Operations and Procedures Manual (FOPM) for details on the 

maintenance inspections, however it was not submitted. Please provide a copy of the FOPM to the 

FAA. 

Please provide the additional information by December 19, 2014. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

Nia Daniels, ARM‐108

Federal Aviation Administration

Office of Rulemaking, Airmen & Airspace Rules Division

800 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20591

PH: (202) 267 ‐ 7626

Fax: (202) 267 ‐ 5075

nia.daniels@faa.gov
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-1514

NANETTE G. LOVE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JOHN POTTER, Postmaster General, USPS; PHILIP

O. BURNS, MDO; ROSE GRAY, Postmaster,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,

Senior District Judge. (1:03-cv-00746-FWB)

Submitted: October 6, 2006 Decided: October 30, 2006

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nanette G. Love, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne P. Klauer, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Nanette G. Love appeals the district court’s order

dismissing her civil action alleging employment discrimination. We

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. See Love v. Potter, No. 1:03-cv-00746-FWB (M.D.N.C. Mar. 1,

2006). 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