alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §16357. Strategy for facilities and infrastructure

#### (a) Facility and infrastructure policy

#### (1) In general

The Secretary shall develop and implement a strategy for facilities and infrastructure supported primarily from the Office of Science, the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, the Office of Fossil Energy, or the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology Programs at all National Laboratories and single-purpose research facilities.

#### (2) Strategy

The strategy shall provide cost-effective means for—

(A) maintaining existing facilities and infrastructure;

(B) closing unneeded facilities;

(C) making facility modifications; and

(D) building new facilities.

#### (b) Report

#### (1) In general

The Secretary shall prepare and submit, along with the budget request of the President submitted to Congress for fiscal year 2018, a report describing the strategy developed under subsection (a).

#### (2) Contents

For each National Laboratory and single-purpose research facility that is primarily used for science and energy research, the report shall contain—

(A) the current priority list of proposed facilities and infrastructure projects, including cost and schedule requirements;

(B) a current 10-year plan that demonstrates the reconfiguration of its facilities and infrastructure to meet its missions and to address its long-term operational costs and return on investment;

(C) the total current budget for all facilities and infrastructure funding; and

(D) the current status of each facility and infrastructure project compared to the original baseline cost, schedule, and scope.

(Pub. L. 109–58, title IX, §993, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 913; Pub. L. 115–246, title II, §205(a), Sept. 28, 2018, 132 Stat. 3137.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–246, §205(a)(1), substituted "Strategy for facilities and infrastructure" for "Strategy and plan for science and energy facilities and infrastructure" in section catchline.

Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 115–246, §205(a)(2), substituted "2018" for "2008".
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          59,046
<SECURITIES>                                    73,639
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,244
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               136,832
<PP&E>                                          36,758
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,181
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 168,085
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,002
<BONDS>                                         16,036
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       198,074
<OTHER-SE>                                    (67,027)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   168,085
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,737
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,368
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                24,747
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 736
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (34,698)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (34,698)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (34,698)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.31)
        

</TABLE>
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES ex rel. BONNIE

LAMMERS, M.D.,

Plaintiff and Relator,

v.

FARIDEH HEIDARPOUR, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 08-03411 WHA

ORDER DISMISSING

CERTAIN PARTIES

Pursuant to the stipulation filed on September 3, it is hereby ordered that this action,

which was previously dismissed without prejudice, is now dismissed with prejudice as to

defendants Farideh Heidarpour, Ali Heidarpour, and A.B.C. Billing, Inc.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 8, 2015. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-03411-WHA Document 79 Filed 09/08/15 Page 1 of 1
### §§280f to 280f–3. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Sections 280f to 280f–3, which provided for the establishment of a Fetal Alcohol Syndrome prevention and services program, were omitted pursuant to section 280f–3 which provided that this part would no longer apply on the date that was 7 years after the date on which all members of the National Task Force on Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and Fetal Alcohol Effect established under section 280f(d)(1) were appointed, which occurred May 17, 2000.

Section 280f, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title III, §399H, formerly §399G, as added Pub. L. 105–392, title IV, §419(d), Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3593; renumbered §399H and amended Pub. L. 106–310, div. A, title V, §502(4)(A), (B), Oct. 17, 2000, 114 Stat. 1115, required the Secretary of Health and Human Services to establish a comprehensive Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and Fetal Alcohol Effect prevention, intervention and services delivery program and to establish the National Task Force on Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and Fetal Alcohol Effect.

Section 280f–1, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title III, §399I, formerly §399H, as added Pub. L. 105–392, title IV, §419(d), Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3594; renumbered §399I, Pub. L. 106–310, div. A, title V, §502(4)(A), Oct. 17, 2000, 114 Stat. 1115, provided eligibility criteria for receiving a grant or entering into a cooperative agreement or contract under this part.

Section 280f–2, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title III, §399J, formerly §399I, as added Pub. L. 105–392, title IV, §419(d), Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3595; renumbered §399J and amended Pub. L. 106–310, div. A, title V, §502(4)(A), (C), Oct. 17, 2000, 114 Stat. 1115, authorized appropriations to carry out this part.

Section 280f–3, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title III, §399K, formerly §399J, as added Pub. L. 105–392, title IV, §419(d), Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3595; renumbered §399K and amended Pub. L. 106–310, div. A, title V, §502(4)(A), (D), Oct. 17, 2000, 114 Stat. 1115, provided for the expiration of this part 7 years after the date on which all members of the National Task Force had been appointed.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Congressional Findings and Purpose

Pub. L. 105–392, title IV, §419(b), (c), Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3591, 3592, as amended by Pub. L. 111–256, §2(g), Oct. 5, 2010, 124 Stat. 2644, provided findings and purpose related to prevention of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and Fetal Alcohol Effect.
###### Editorial Note on Part 40

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear at 71 FR 34520 and 34521, June 15, 2006.

#### § 40.206 Frivolous applications. [Reserved]
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-07-0116-454-CV

IN RE LENNAR CORPORATION,	RELATORS

BARBARA WELKE, JACK DAWSON, 

DOUG MURPHY, AND DONNY HENDRIX	

InN rReE DeEeE AnNnN SmMiItThH	RELATOR	

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

	ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

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

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

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

	The court has considered relator’s’ petition for writ of mandamus or prohibition and is of the opinion that relief should be deniedA as mootS .    Accordingly, relator’s’ petition for writ of mandamus is denied Aas moot.    In addition, this court vacates the portion of its jANUARYJanuary 16, 2007 March 24, 2006 order staying that stayed respondent’s December 18, 2006 order denying ap protective order, and January 5, 2007 order extending the d;eaeadline for requiring relator to answswewer discovery on or before January 18, 2007, in trial court causse number 28,674-A.the requirement of production of documents by relators of documents referenced in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the trial court’s order of February 24, 2006.

	Relators shall pay all costs of this original proceeding, for which let execution issue.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL A:   LIVINGSTON, GARDNER, and WALKERCAYCE, C.J.; WALKER and MCCOY, JJ.

DELIVERED:  February 78, 2007December 21, 2006
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Charles La Placa, Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed and matter remitted to the Monroe County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum. Memorandum: If the court based its decision upon any part of the minutes of the Grand Jury in passing upon the original motion for a writ of error *coram nobis,*then such part of the minutes should be part of the record on appeal and the court should grant access thereto for the purpose of making up the record on appeal. However, if the court did not base its decision on the minutes, then such steps should be taken as might be necessary to correct and amend the recitals in the original order denying the writ of error *coram nobis.*(Appeal from order of Monroe County Court denying motion by defendant for an inspection of the Grand Jury minutes.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
744
|
71
Ld
0 20 40 80 120 160 200
OO
Kilometers
CO Ek ciaa 0 1020 40 60 80 100
|
(430) Elk Herd Areas Miles

() Rawiins RMPPA

Map 4-4
Elk

Cumulative Impact Analysis Area

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                       4,508,619
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  482,739
<ALLOWANCES>                                    11,630
<INVENTORY>                                    106,287
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,150,666
<PP&E>                                         328,021
<DEPRECIATION>                                 100,384
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,508,360
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,155,505
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        38,045
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,508,360
<SALES>                                      1,873,774
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,873,774
<CGS>                                        1,215,970
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,207,506
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (102,995)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              39,793
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,270,530)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,270,530)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,270,530)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.40)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.40)
        

</TABLE>
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NANCY LANGSTON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

NORTH AMERICAN ASSET

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION GROUP

DISABILITY PLAN,

Defendant. /

No. C 08-02560 SI

ORDER SETTING EVIDENTIARY

HEARING AND BRIEFING SCHEDULE

ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION

Plaintiff has filed a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration of this Court’s January

20, 2010 order granting plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees. Plaintiff challenges the $400 per hour rate

awarded for work completed by lead plaintiff’s counsel Laurence Padway. 

The Court wishes to receive additional briefing and evidence from the parties as to the issue of

Mr. Padway’s hourly rate. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-9(d), the Court therefore sets the following

briefing and hearing schedule. The Court will hold an evidentiary hearing on the issue of Mr. Padway’s

hourly rate on Wednesday, April 7, 2010, at 3:30 p.m. In accordance with the Local Rules, Plaintiff’s

motion and supporting memorandum must be filed no later than five weeks prior to the hearing date,

defendant’s opposition no later than three weeks prior to the hearing date, and plaintiff’s optional reply

no later than two weeks prior to the hearing date. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 4, 2010 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-02560-SI Document 84 Filed 02/04/10 Page 1 of 1
f8k090810ex10i_yesdtc.htm


Exhibit 10.1


 



PROMISSORY NOTE


 


 




	
 AMOUNT: $ 7,000.00

	
DATE: September 8, 2010







 


For value received, the terms of this Promissory Note (the "Note") dictate that YesDTC, Inc. (the "Borrower") promises to pay to the order of Joseph Noel (the "Lender"), maintaining an address at 300 Beale Street, Suite 613, San Francisco, CA 94105 (the Lender's address), the principal sum of Seven Thousand Dollars


($            $7,000.00                 ) in U.S. currency (the "Principal Amount").


 


Use of Proceeds: Proceeds from the value received of this Note shall be used by the Borrower for general corporate purposes.


 


Interest: Interest on the Principal Amount shall be equal to 10.0% per annum. This amount shall be determined on a pro rata basis for any monthly or fractional basis thereof. Interest is not compoundable and may be paid monthly or in full at the end of the Borrowing Period.


 


Terms of Repayment: The entire Principal Amount shall be fully paid by the Borrower to the Lender on or before December 8, 2010 or within ninety days (90 days) from the date of this Note (the "Borrowing Period").


 



All or any part of the Principal may be prepaid at any time and from time to time without penalty.


 




 


This Promissory Note between the Borrower and Lender is signed and dated as per below.




 



	 /s/ Joseph Noel	 	 9-8-2010
	 The Borrower 	 	 Date:
	 	 	 
	 /s/ Joseph Noel	 	 9-8-2010
	 The Lender   	 	 Date:
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. William A. Tarpley, Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed. (Appeal from order of Erie Special Term denying without a hearing petitioner’s motion for writ of error *coram nobis,*and dismissing the petition.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
Form of Executive Bonus Plan Schedule



 Exhibit 10.2 
 EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP 
 BONUS PLAN SCHEDULE 

Pursuant to the Fiscal Year 2011 Campus Support Bonus Plan 
  

 
  

																																									
	 Award as a % of Annual Base
Pay
	  	 	 	 	  				  				  				  				  				  				  				 	 	Components	  
	 Target
%
	  	 	 	 	  				  				  				  				  				  				  				 	 	Company Budgeted Operating Profit	  	  	 	100	% 
	 Maximum %
	  	 	 	 	  				  				  				  				  				  				  				 				  			

  

									
	 Gate

	Compliance -
The company must receive an annual average compliance audit score of “3.5” or better to achieve a bonus award under both company operating profit and management objectives.


Company Budgeted Operating Profit Payout Tiers (1) 

											
	 	  	% of Operating Profit
Goal Achieved	 	 	 	  	
Company Profit
 Portion as % Salary
	 
	 Maximum
	  	3	 130.0	% 	 		  	 	200.0	% 
		  	 	124.0	% 	 		  	 	180.0	% 
		  	 	118.0	% 	 		  	 	160.0	% 
		  	 	112.0	% 	 		  	 	140.0	% 
		  	 	106.0	% 	 		  	 	120.0	% 
	 Target
	  	 	100.0	% 	 		  	 	100.0	% 
		  	 	98.0	% 	 		  	 	66.0	% 
		  	 	96.0	% 	 		  	 	57.0	% 
		  	 	94.0	% 	 		  	 	48.0	% 
		  	 	92.0	% 	 		  	 	39.0	% 
		  	 	90.0	% 	 		  	 	30.0	% 
		  	<	 90.0	% 	 		  	 	0.0	% 


(1) Awards for performance levels shown are calculated using interpolation between points.
§ 518.12 Forms for applying for Federal assistance. ( a ) Federal awarding agencies shall comply with the applicable report clearance requirements of 5 CFR part 1320, “Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the Public,” with regard to all forms used by the Federal awarding agency in place of or as a supplement to the Standard Form 424 (SF-424) series.
( b ) Applicants shall use the SF-424 series or those forms and instructions prescribed by the Federal awarding agency.
( c ) For Federal programs covered by E.O. 12372, “Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs,” the applicant shall complete the appropriate sections of the SF-424 (Application for Federal Assistance) indicating whether the application was subject to review by the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC). The name and address of the SPOC for a particular State can be obtained from the Federal awarding agency or the *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.* The SPOC shall advise the applicant whether the program for which application is made has been selected by that State for review.
( d ) Federal awarding agencies that do not use the SF-424 form should indicate whether the application is subject to review by the State under E.O. 12372.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2468 

To suspend temporarily the duty on noils of camel hair. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 18, 2005 

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on noils of camel hair. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NOILS OF CAMEL HAIR. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.42.02 Noils of camel hair (provided 

for in subheading 

5103.10.00) ......................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 
2 

•HR 2468 IH 

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Hyman Rossman, Appellant.

Motion for leave to dispense with printing granted. The appeal will be heard on the original papers (including the typed minutes) and on a typewritten brief. The appellant is directed to file five copies of his brief and to serve one copy. The appellant’s time to perfect the appeal is enlarged to the January 1961 Term. Motion for assignment of counsel granted. Marshall G. Kaplan, Esq., 50 Court Street, Brooklyn 1, New York, is assigned as counsel to prosecute the appeal. Nolan, P. J., Beldoek, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.
#### § 204.23 Payment to A.I.D. of excess amounts received by the lender of any assignee.

If the Lender or Assignee shall, as a result of A.I.D. paying compensation under this Guaranty, receive an excess payment, it shall refund the excess to A.I.D.
§ 51.64 Special validation of passports for travel to restricted areas. ( a ) A U.S. national may apply to the Department for a special validation of his or passport to permit its use for travel to, or use in, a restricted country or area. The application must be accompanied by evidence that the applicant falls within one of the categories in paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) The Department may grant a special validation if it determines that the validation is in the national interest of the United States.
( c ) A special validation may be determined to be in the national interest if: ( 1 ) The applicant is a professional reporter or journalist, the purpose of whose trip is to obtain, and make available to the public, information about the restricted area; or
( 2 ) The applicant is a representative of the International Committee of the Red Cross or the American Red Cross traveling pursuant to an officially-sponsored Red Cross mission; or
( 3 ) The applicant's trip is justified by compelling humanitarian considerations; or
( 4 ) The applicant's request is otherwise in the national interest.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John P. Wronski, Jr., Appellant.

[716 NYS2d 512]

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted after a jury trial of two counts each of sodomy in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.50 [3]) and sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65 [3]) and one count of sodomy in the second degree (Penal Law § 130.45). The victim was 14 years old at the time of trial in March and April 1999, and the indictment alleged that the acts of sodomy and sexual abuse were committed in October 1993, September 1994 and December 1995. Defendant had been prosecuted in 1989 for assault in the third degree for burning the victim, who was then four years old, with a cigarette. During the trial court’s voir dire of the victim in the assault trial, he admitted that he had burned himself on a toaster and that his mother had instructed him to falsely accuse defendant. In the present trial, County Court granted the *in limine*motion of the prosecutor seeking to preclude cross-examination on or evidence concerning the information elicited on the 1989 voir dire.

We reject the contention of defendant that the court’s preclusion ruling violated his constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him. Contrary to defendant’s assertion, the court did not preclude defendant from cross-examining the victim or his sister on the subject of whether his mother had induced him to falsely accuse defendant in connection with the sodomy and sexual abuse charges for which defendant was on trial; the motion and ruling were limited to the 1989 incident. Although a defendant’s right to elicit evidence “tending to establish a reason to fabricate” is never collateral *(People v Hudy,*73 NY2d 40, 56; *see,*US Const Sixth Amend; NY Const, art I, § 6; *People v Chin,*67 NY2d 22, 27-28; *People v Ashner,*190 AD2d 238, 248), “a court may, in the exercise of discretion, *1000properly exclude such proof when it is too remote or speculative *(see, People v Thomas,*46 NY2d 100, 105-106, *appeal dismissed*444 US 891; *People v Stewart,*188 AD2d 626, 627)” *(People v Cullen,*236 AD2d 808, *lv denied*89 NY2d 1010; *see, People v Retzer,*245 AD2d 1132, *lv denied*91 NY2d 976). Here, the evidence precluded was both remote and speculative because the incident occurred 10 years earlier, when the victim was only four years old.

We reject the further contentions of defendant that, based on the court’s preclusion ruling, he was denied effective assistance of counsel, and that the sentence is unduly harsh or severe. (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Fricano, J.— Sodomy, 1st Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Scudder and Kehoe, JJ.