alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §6703. Grants supplementing Federal contributions under other Federal laws; Federal share

In addition to the grants otherwise authorized by this chapter, the Secretary is authorized to make a grant for the purpose of increasing the Federal contribution to a public works project for which Federal financial assistance is authorized under provisions of law other than this chapter. Any grant made for a public works project under this section shall be in such amount as may be necessary to make the Federal share of the cost of such project 100 per centum. No grant shall be made for a project under this section unless the Federal financial assistance for such project authorized under provisions of law other than this chapter is immediately available for such project and construction of such project has not yet been initiated because of lack of funding for the non-Federal share.

(Pub. L. 94–369, title I, §104, July 22, 1976, 90 Stat. 999.)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gilbert Dilan, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered January 15, 1976, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. Defendant was charged in three counts of an indictment with commission of the crimes of: (1) criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree; (2) criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree; and (3) criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree. All three counts relate to the same transaction. Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of the sale count and acquitted of the two possession counts. He now asserts, *inter alia,*that "the verdict of conviction on the sale count is so inconsistent with the verdict of acquittal on the two possession counts as to be truly repugnant.” We do not agree. The evidence reveals that defendant negotiated with, and accepted money from, two undercover officers, agreeing in exchange therefor to supply a quantity of heroin. This is sufficient to constitute guilt of the sale count (see Penal Law, §§ 220.39, 220.00, subd 1). However, the evidence also shows that defendant never actually had the drugs in his possession and that physical delivery to the undercover agents was made by a third person. The verdict is consistent with these facts (see People *v Pratts,*50 AD2d 937). We have considered defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Hopkins, J. P., Hawkins and Suozzi, JJ., concur. Shapiro, J., concurs in the result on constraint of the holding in *People v Pratts*(50 AD2d 937).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
ACCOMPANYING CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF TICKETMASTER GROUP, INC. FOR
THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JULY 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                          83,250
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   42,932
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      4,007
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               139,897
<PP&E>                                          68,274
<DEPRECIATION>                                (27,309)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 320,272
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          129,525
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      41,324
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   320,272
<SALES>                                        158,698
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               158,698
<CGS>                                          135,446
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  135,446
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,486
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,286
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,410
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,550
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,860
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,860
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 3282
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3282 appear at 78 FR 60199, Oct. 1, 2013.

§ 3282.151 Applicability and scope. ( a ) This subpart sets out procedures to be followed when an opportunity to present views provided for in the Act is requested by an appropriate party. Section 3282.152 provides for two types of procedures that may be followed, one informal and nonadversary, and one more formal and adversary. Section 3282.152 also sets out criteria to govern which type of procedure will be followed in particular cases.
( b ) The procedures of § 3282.152 also apply to: ( 1 ) Proceedings held by the Secretary whenever the suspension or disqualification of a primary inspection agency, which has been granted final approval, is recommended under § 3282.356 of these regulations, and
( 2 ) Resolution of disputes where an SAA or manufacturer disagrees with a determination of a DAPIA under § 3282.361 that a manufactured home design does or does not conform to the standards or that a quality assurance manual is or is not adequate with a decision by an IPIA to red tag or not to red tag or to provide or not to provide a certification label for a manufactured home under § 3282.362 when the IPIA believes that the manufactured home does or does not conform to the standards.
( c ) The procedures set out in § 3282.152 shall also be followed whenever State Administrative Agencies hold Formal or Informal Presentations of Views under § 3282.309.
( d ) To the extent that these regulations provide for Formal or Informal Presentations of Views for parties that would otherwise qualify for hearings under 2 CFR part 2424, the procedures of 2 CFR part 2424 shall not be available and shall not apply.
[41 FR 19852, May 13, 1976, as amended at 51 FR 34467, Sept. 29, 1986; 61 FR 10442, Mar. 13, 1996; 72 FR 73497, Dec. 27, 2007]
§ 248.301 Initial application. A State agency shall make an initial application to the Commissioner which: ( a ) Describes the manner by which the State housing program provides mortgage assistance or subsidy to private mortgagors to provide housing opportunities for low and moderate income families;
( b ) Includes copies of the authorizing legislation, any implementing regulations and any administrative guidance provided to owners;
( c ) Includes a comprehensive description of the terms and conditions under which a private owner may prepay the assisted or subsidized mortgage without the prior consent of the State agency;
( d ) Includes a complete set of pro forma mortgage and/or regulatory documents which evidence an owner's ability to prepay the assisted or subsidized mortgage without the consent of the State agency;
( e ) Includes a list of all properties assisted under the State or local housing program whose owners are eligible to prepay the assisted or subsidized mortgages without the consent of the State agency.
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

BROWMAN FAMILY VINEYARDS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CAVIT CANTINA VITICOLTORI

CONSORZIO CANTINE SOCIALI DEL

TRENTINO SOCIETA COOPERATIVA,

Defendant. /

No. C 09-01070 JSW

AMENDED ORDER REFERRING

CASE FOR SETTLEMENT

CONFERENCE

The Court ORDERS that pursuant to Civil Local Rule 72-1 and ADR Local Rule 7-2,

this matter is referred to a randomly-assigned magistrate judge to conduct a settlement

conference. The settlement conference shall be conducted within sixty days, if possible. The

parties will be advised of the date, time and place of appearance by notice from the assigned

magistrate judge. 

The Court FURTHER ORDERS that the pretrial conference and trial are CONTINUED

to October 12, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. and November 1, 2010 at 8:00 a.m., respectively. The parties

are directed to file all future documents in the above-captioned case and not in Case No. 09-

02470.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 9, 2010 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: Ellen Fritz

Case 3:09-cv-01070-JSW Document 77 Filed 06/09/10 Page 1 of 1
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2500

To restore the jurisdiction of the Consumer Product Safety Commission 

over amusement park rides which are at a fixed site, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 19, 2005

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

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL

To restore the jurisdiction of the Consumer Product Safety 

Commission over amusement park rides which are at 

a fixed site, 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. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Amusement 

5 Park Ride Safety Act of 2005’’. 

6 SEC. 2. JURISDICTION OVER FIXED SITE AMUSEMENT 

7 RIDES. 

8 Section 3(a)(1) of the Consumer Product Safety Act 

9 (15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘, and 

10 which is not permanently fixed to a site. Such term does 
2

•HR 2500 IH 

1 not include such a device which is permanently fixed to 

2 a site.’’ and inserting a period. 

3 SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

4 There are authorized to be appropriated to the Con5 sumer Product Safety Commission $500,000 for each fis6 cal year to enable the Commission to carry out the Con7 sumer Product Safety Act as amended by this Act.

Æ
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
Youhave reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection(FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in theFDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suiteof cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications (CGP).
**Title:****Light list. Volume I, Atlantic Coast,St. Croix River, Maine to Shrewsbury River, New Jersey.
 
2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2009
2010 | 2011| 2012 | 2013| 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017| 2018 | 2019
2020 | 2021
 
SuDoc Number:HS 7.22:V.1/
Item Number:0520-L-01 (online)
CGP System Number:000609055
 
 
 
** 
**Permanent Public Access
** 
Title 44 of  the United States Code (44 U.S.C. Section 1911) stipulates that public access  to official Government information products disseminated through the Federal  Depository Library Program (FDLP) must be maintained permanently in regional  depository libraries and by depository libraries not served by a regional  library. Since online products are not physically distributed to depository  libraries for retention, GPO has assumed responsibility for the provision of  permanent access to Government information products residing on FDsys  servers.
GPO's  permanent public access commitment is also met by bringing  agency-disseminated Internet resources under the purview of GPO and  incorporating them into a digital archive. GPO captures copies of agency  electronic information products, and creates PURLs so that users will be  automatically redirected to the archived products if the information is no  longer accessible on the agency Web site. Please refer to the report Managing  the FDLP Electronic Collection: A Policy and Planning Document for more  information.
 
August 3, 2017********
Ja ~~E~ sr qT ~
s 2 ~Ay~ $ ~ w c~ Z ~ yIA C PRO 117 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460



### J. R. Stroble Manager, National TRU Program Carlsbad Field Office U.S. Department of Energy P.O. Box 3090 Carlsbad, NM 88221-3090 Dear Mr. Stroble: On July 5, 2011 the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) requested the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) approval of the Super High Efficiency Neutron Counter (SuperHENC), non-destructive assay (NDA) system for contact-handled (CH) transuranic (TRU) waste used by the Central Characterization Project (CCP) at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). With this letter, EPA approves the SuperHENC to be used to characterize waste at LANI.- CCP subject to the limitations of its calibration and our report. In the LANL-CCP baseline inspection report (Docket No. A-98-49; II-A4-88), EPA identified the addition of a new NDA system as a Tier 1 change, which requires EPA approval prior to implementation. According to the requirements of 40 CFR 194.8 (b), DOE requested approval of the SuperHENC for CH TRU waste as a Tier 1 change to the LANL-CCP CH baseline approval. EPA conducted an on-site evaluation of the LANL-CCP SuperHENC on August 16-17, 2011. EPA's inspection of the SuperHENC included an examination of the procedures, a review of the calibration records, a demonstration of the SuperHENC, replicate measurements run at EPA's request, and an examination of Batch Data Reports generated by the SuperHENC. EPA's inspection report (Docket No. A-98-49; II-A4-153) for the SuperHENC is enclosed and will be placed in the Agency's public docket. EPA has determined that the SuperHENC used by LANL-CCP is adequate for the characterization of CH TRU waste in standard waste boxes at LANL-CCP. This approval does not make any changes to the tiering table provided with the baseline approval. Changes to the approved components of the SuperHENC system at LANL-CCP must follow the tiering requirements described in the baseline inspection report issued for the LANL-CCP CH TRU program.



### ~~

, j Recycled/Recyclable



## ~ Printed wlth Soy/Canola Ink on paper that contelns at Ieast 50% recycled fiberIf you have any questions regarding this approval, please contact Ed Feltcorn at (202) 343-9422 or

Rajani Joglekar at (202) 343-9462.

Sincerely,



# ~ 1 v Tom Peake, Director Center for Waste Management and Regulations

Enclosure

cc: Electronic Distribution Ed Ziemianski, CBFO Courtland Fesmire, CBFO QA Norma Castaneda, CBFO Mike Sensibaugh, CCP Tim Hall, NMED Raymond Lee, EPA HQ Site Documents
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 

Case No. 5:09-cv-2112 JW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

WITH PREJUDICE

DM_US:23124880_1 

HOWREY LLP 

David N. Kuhn (SBN 73389) 

Attorney-at-Law 

144 Hagar Avenue 

Piedmont, California 94611 

Telephone: (510) 653-4983 

Facsimile: (510) 653-4983 

dnkuhn@pacbell.net 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

GREGORY BENDER 

Denise M. De Mory (SBN 168076) 

demoryd@howrey.com

Irene Yang (SBN 245464) 

yangi@howrey.com 

HOWREY LLP 

525 Market Street, Suite 3600 

San Francisco, California 94105 

Telephone: (415) 848-4900 

Facsimile: (415) 848-4999 

Attorneys for Defendant 

NXP SEMICONDUCTORS USA, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

GREGORY BENDER, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES NORTH 

AMERICA CORP., a Delaware corporation, 

NXP SEMICONDUCTORS USA, INC., a 

Delaware corporation, ON SEMICONDUCTOR 

CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, and 

SILICON LABORATORIES INC., a Delaware 

corporation, 

Defendants. 

 Case No. 5:09-cv-02112-JW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

OF DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS AND 

COUNTERCLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE 

Judge: Hon. James Ware 

Case 3:09-cv-02112-RS Document 40 Filed 03/15/10 Page 1 of 2
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 

Case No. 5:09-cv-2112 JW 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

WITH PREJUDICE

-1- 

DM_US:23124880_1 

HOWREY LLP 

Plaintiff Gregory Bender (“Bender”) and Defendant and Counterclaimant NXP Semiconductors 

USA, Inc. (“NXP”) hereby submit this Stipulation of Dismissal. 

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Bender and NXP 

hereby stipulate to dismiss with prejudice all claims and counterclaims in this action asserted by 

Bender against NXP and by NXP against Bender. This dismissal applies only to NXP; Bender does 

not dismiss any claims pending against any other defendant in this case. Bender and NXP stipulate 

that each will bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees relating to the dismissed claims. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

Dated: March 11, 2010 Respectfully submitted, 

HOWREY LLP 

By: /s/ Denise M. De Mory 

Denise M. De Mory 

Attorneys for Defendant 

NXP SEMICONDUCTORS USA, INC. 

In accordance with General Order No. 45, Section X(B), the above signatory attests that 

concurrence in the filing of the document has been obtained from the signatory below. 

Dated: March 11, 2010 DAVID N. KUHN 

By: /s/ David N. Kuhn 

David N. Kuhn 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

GREGORY BENDER 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED 

Dated: ________, 2010 

Hon. James Ware 

Judge, United States District Court 

March 15

Case 3:09-cv-02112-RS Document 40 Filed 03/15/10 Page 2 of 2
#### Ida M. Dawn, Respondent, v. David Dawn, Appellant.

Motion by appellant for a stay pending appeal, granted to the extent of staying the directions in the order appealed from with respect to the custody of the child Robert, on condition that the appeal be perfected and that appellant be ready to argue or submit it at the December Term, beginning November 28, 1960. The appeal is ordered on the calendar for said term. Appellant’s brief shall be filed and served on or before November 10, I960. In all other respects, the motion for the stay is denied. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
§ 3280.1005 Electrical service. ( a ) Each attached manufactured home must be supplied by only one service.
( b ) Service conductors supplying one manufactured home must not pass through the interior of another manufactured home.
EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Frank Elenio, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of RoomLinX, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial  condition,  results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officer  and  I  are  responsible  for
establishing and maintaining  disclosure  controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure  controls and procedures,  or caused such disclosure
controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to ensure that
material  information  relating to the registrant is made known to us by others,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  registrant's  disclosure  controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions  about the effectiveness
of the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed  in this report any changes in the  registrant's  internal  control
over  financial  reporting  that occurred  during the  registrant's  most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's  fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has  materially  affected,  or is  reasonably  likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal controls over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed,  based on our
most recent  evaluation of internal  control over  financial  reporting,  to the
registrant's  auditors  and the audit  committee  of the  registrant's  board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all  significant  deficiencies  and  material  weaknesses  in the  design  or
operation of internal  control over  financial  reporting  which are  reasonably
likely  to  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability  to  record,  process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.

Date: May 19, 2005

                                                /s/ Frank Elenio
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Frank Elenio
                                                Chief Financial Officer