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

TO:Kristina Spencer

FROM:The Secretary

# SUBJECT:Delegation of Authority for Ethics Program

## I. Delegation

Under the authority vested in me by section 412 of the Department of Education Organization Act (DEOA), 20 U.S.C. 3472, and 5 CFR Section 2638.104(d), I appoint you, Kristina Spencer, as the U.S. Department of Education’s Alternate Designated Agency Ethics Official.  In accordance with 5 CFR Sections 2638.104(d) and (f) and 2638.107(a), I hereby delegate to you the authority to serve as the primary deputy to the Department’s Designated Agency Ethics Official in the administration of the Department’s ethics program.  Unless otherwise noted in future delegations of authority, amendments by law, rule, or regulation to the authority herein are included within the scope of this delegation.

## II. Reservations

There are no reservations.

## III. Redelegations

The authority may not be redelegated.

## IV. Certification and Effective Date

This delegation is effective upon certification by the Department’s Principal Delegation Control Officer and supersedes delegation EA/EGR6/122 certified on December 1, 2010 and all previous delegations of this authority.

________/s_______________

Betsy DeVos

OGC Clearance and Date:1/18/18

Certified Date:1/23/18

Departmental Delegations Control Officer: Jim Clemmens

Control No: EA/EG/126
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket**

Docket Number: F AA- 2014 - 0061 Directorate Identifier: 2013NM029AD

A330 - 53 - 3143 --- 12/24/04 A330 - 53 - 3143, R04 --- 12/6/11 A330 - 53 - 3143, R03 --- 3/3/11 A330 - 53 - 3143, R02 --- 8/31/10

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docke t 

### MA **Y BE VIEWED AT:** Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 0 3/05/2008
### §1704c. Payments by Secretary of Defense in liquidation of amount due for foreign currencies

The Secretary of Defense shall pay to the Commodity Credit Corporation an amount not to exceed $6,000,000 per year until the amount due for foreign currencies used for housing constructed or acquired under title II of the Food for Peace Act (7 U.S.C. 1721–1726) has been liquidated.

(Pub. L. 97–214, §9(a), July 12, 1982, 96 Stat. 174; Pub. L. 110–246, title III, §3001(b)(1)(A), (2)(C), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1820.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Food for Peace Act (7 U.S.C. 1721–1726), referred to in text, is act July 10, 1954, ch. 469, 68 Stat. 457. Title II of the Act is classified generally to subchapter III (§1721 et seq.) of chapter 41 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1691 of this title and Tables.

#### Codification

Section consists of section 9(a) of Pub. L. 97–214. Section 9(b) of Pub. L. 97–214 is classified as a note set out under section 1594k of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.

Section was enacted as part of the Military Construction Codification Act, and not as part of the Food for Peace Act which comprises this chapter.

#### Amendments

2008—Pub. L. 110–246 substituted "Food for Peace Act" for "Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954".

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

#### Effective Date of 2008 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, see section 4(b) of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as an Effective Date note under section 8701 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Section effective Oct. 1, 1982, and applicable to military construction projects, and to construction and acquisition of military family housing before, on or after such date, see section 12(a) of Pub. L. 97–214, set out as a note under section 2801 of Title 10, Armed Forces.
**UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION**

# THE  SECRETARY

## MEMORANDUM

**TO:**Inspector General

FROM:The Secretary

SUBJECT:Delegation of Authority Under the Privacy Act to Request Disclosure of Records Maintained by Another Federal Agency

I. Delegation

Under the authority vested in me by section 412 of the Department of Education Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. §3472, I hereby delegate to the Inspector General or his successor in function, and to any individual performing the responsibilities of his position in an acting capacity, the authority to make written requests for the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) to another agency or to any instrumentality of the U.S. Government for records for a legally authorized OIG civil or criminal law enforcement activity, pursuant to the Privacy Act, Title 5, United States Code, Section 552a, Subsection (b)(7).

Unless otherwise noted in future delegations of authority, future legislative amendments to the authority delegated herein are included within the scope of this delegation.

II. Reservations

None.

III.Redelegation

The Inspector General may redelegate or authorize redelegation of any of the authority contained herein to the level of Associate, Assistant and Deputy Assistant Inspectors General in headquarters or to the level of Regional Inspector General in the regional officies.  See OMB Guidelines, 40 Fed. Reg. 28,948,

 28, 955 (1975).

· 2  -

IV.Certification and Effective Date

This delegation is effective upon certification by the Department’s Principal Delegation Control Officer and supersedes all previous delegations of this authority.

_________/s/_____________ 

        Richard W. Riley

**OGC Clearance****and Date:**/s/ R. Wexler, 7/11/94

**Certification Date**:  7/22/94

**Certified by Departmental Delegations Control Officer:**/s/ Wilma J. Hodo****

**Control Number**:   EA/EF/78

***Our mission is to ensure equal access to education and to promote educational excellence throughout the Nation.***
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 16

- 00037

- CV

JAMES NICHOLS, MELIS SA NICHOLS,

MARTHA MOORE, AND ED WARD NICHOLS,

INDIVIDUALLY AND AS HEIRS OF THE

ESTATE OF MELODY NIC HOLS

, Appellant s

v.

STEVE MCKINNEY

, Appellee

From the 40th District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 89372

O R D E R

We ordered the parties to mediation on May 23, 2018. Mediation was to take place

within 30 days from the date of the order. The parties filed a timely joint objection to

mediation. We have not yet ruled on that objection. The parties have now filed a J oint

Request for Extension of Time to Mediate.Nichols v. McKinney Page 2

The request is granted. T he mediation order issued on May 23, 2018 is stayed until

further order of the Court.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Judge Towslee Corbett 1

Mediation stayed

Request dismissed

Order issued and filed June 20 , 2018

1 The Honorable Reva Towslee Corbett , Judge of the 335th District Court of Bastrop, Burleson, Lee, and

Washington Count ies , sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to

section 74.003(h) of the Government Code. See T EX

. G OV ' T C ODE A NN . § 74.003(h) ( West 2013).
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


                             EMS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


                                CERTIFICATION OF


                            CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


                                      AND


                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


     Each of the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of EMS Technologies, Inc. hereby individually certifies that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September
27, 2003, to which this Certification is attached, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and that the information contained in such Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of EMS
Technologies, Inc.


     In witness whereof, each of the undersigned has executed and delivered
this Certification on this 11th day of November 2003.


/s/ Alfred G. Hansen                         /s/ Don T. Scartz
------------------------------               -----------------------------
Alfred G. Hansen                             Don T. Scartz
Chief Executive Officer                      Chief Financial Officer
EMS Technologies, Inc.                       EMS Technologies, Inc.
September 16, 2013

VIA Electronic Mail

Mr. Don Scata

Office of Environment and Energy

Federal Aviation Administration

800 Independence Ave, SW

Washington D.C. 20591

donald.scata@faa.gov

RE: Request for Extension of Comment Period for the Notice, Order 1050.1F Environmental 

Impact: Policies and Procedures, Docket No. FAA-2013-0685-0001

Dear Mr. Scata:

Airports Council International—North America (ACI-NA) respectfully requests a fourteen-day 

extension of the comment period for the Notice (Docket No. FAA-2013-0685-0001), Order 

1050.1F Environmental Impact: Policies and Procedures (the draft Order), which was published 

in the Federal Register on August 14, 2013.

ACI-NA represents local, regional and state governing bodies that own and operate 

commercial airports in the United States and Canada. As you may know, ACI-NA’s over 300 

member airports enplane more than 95 percent of the domestic and virtually all of the 

international airline passenger and cargo traffic in North America. Nearly 400 aviation-related 

businesses are also members of ACI-NA, providing goods and services to airports.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on the draft Order, but request additional 

time for review. ACI-NA and our members aim to provide thoughtful and helpful comments to 

the FAA regarding this Notice, and in accordance with this goal, we believe that an extension in 

the comment period is necessary for the following reasons:

(1) Time is needed for ACI-NA and its members to fully evaluate the draft Order to 

understand the changes from the previous Order 1050.1E, and its impacts on airport 

operations, projects and other actions. An initial review of the draft Order has produced a 

significant number of potential concerns and questions from our members, and more time 

is needed to consider these issues and come to consensus. 

(2) The comment period—which extends from August 14, 2013, to September 30, 2013—

occurs during a time period that is extremely busy for airports—which have a key role in 

commenting on the draft Order. 
2

2

(3) Finally, the draft Order differs significantly in its organizational structure from Order 

1050.1E, which adds a layer of complexity to our review process.

ACI-NA appreciates the opportunity to comment on the draft Order and in collaboration with our 

members, looks forward to providing the Agency with meaningful comments regarding it. To 

facilitate needed industry participation in the rulemaking process, we respectfully request that 

Agency grant the 14-day extension, to October 14, 2013, of the comment period.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

Katherine Preston

Senior Director, Environmental Affairs

Airports Council International – North America
#### ROBBINS v. FREEMAN

No. 416PA97

Case below: 127 N.C.App. 162

Petition by defendant-appellees for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 allowed 2 October 1997. Petition by defendantappellees for writ of supersedeas allowed 2 October 1997.
THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20202

TO: The Assistant Secretary

Office of Postsecondary Education 

FROM: The Secretary

SUBJECT: Amendment No. 1 to Delegation of Programmatic Authority 

I. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

Under the authority vested in me by section 412 of the Department of Education 

Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. § 3472, I hereby delegate to you, your successor in function, 

and anyone serving for you in an acting capacity or delegated to perform the functions and 

duties of your position, the programmatic authorities described below: 

For programs over which the Assistant Secretary has administrative authority, the 

authority to grant waivers under any waiver authority that the Department or the 

Secretary receives related to COVID-19. 

Authority with respect to the administration of programs authorized under sections 

18001(a)(1), 18001(a)(3), 18002, and 18004 of Division B, Title VIII of the Coronavirus 

Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the CARES Act), Public Law 116-136 (H.R. 

748), March 27, 2020; 134 Stat. 281. 

Unless otherwise noted in future delegations of authority, amendments to the authorities 

delegated herein are included within the scope of this delegation. 

II. RESERVATIONS

Unless otherwise noted in existing or future delegations of authority, the following are not 

delegated:

A. the authority to sign documents for publication in the Federal Register other than 

those documents designated in the delegation of authority to sign Federal Register

documents issued to Principal Officers, EA/GEN/18, certified on December 12, 

2019; 

B. the authority to appoint, and fix compensation of, members of advisory 

councils; and

C. unless otherwise provided by law, the authority to submit reports to 

Congress or the President.
III. REDELEGATION

Subject to applicable provisions of law, and unless otherwise noted, you may redelegate 

any of the authorities delegated to you and may authorize further redelegation. All 

redelegations must be prepared in accordance with the Administrative Communications 

System directive, OM:1-102: Delegations of Authority, dated August 26, 2016.

IV. CERTIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE

This delegation is effective upon certification by the Department’s Principal 

Delegations Control Officer.

I hereby ratify actions within the scope of this delegation taken by the addressee 

prior to the date of certification.

Betsy DeVos (signed)

OGC Review and Date:

Deborah Friendly

04/17/2020

Certified Date: 04/17/2020

Departmental Delegations Control 

Officer: Jim Clemmens

Control Number: EA/EP/398
1. Delete paragraph 8.14 and substitute the following therefore:

All other terms and conditions of Trading Agreement and Order No. 8291 issued by the

Commissioner acting under Chapter 446c, Sections 22a-6, 22a-171, 22a-174, 22a-176, and 22a-177

ofthe Connecticut General Statutes shall remain in effect.

Trading Agreement &

Order No. 8291

Modification 1

)

)

)

)

STATE OF CONNECTICUT

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Reporting: No later than March 1 of every year after issuance of this Trading Agreement

and Order, the Respondent shall submit to the Commissioner a written report containing

copies of all ofthe records required pursuant to Paragraph 8.12 ofthis Trading Agreement

and Order. The Commissioner may prescribe the forms to be used for the submission of

these reports. The Respondent shall submit these reports on such forms, if prescribed by

the Commissioner.

Whereas, the Commissioner of Environmental Protection ("Commissioner") and Hamilton

Sundstrand Corporation (Respondent) having agreed to the terms and conditions set forth in Trading

Agreement and Order 8291 issued on April 26, 2010, do now, by mutual agreement, modify said

Trading Agreement and Order as follows:

State ofConnecticut

&

Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation

(Printed on Recycled Paper)

79 Elm Street • Hartford. CT 06106-5127

www.cl.gov/dep

An Equal Opportunity Employer
Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation 2 Trading Agreement

and Order No. 8291

Modification 1

Respondent hereby consents to the entry ofthis modification to the Trading Agreement and

Order without further notice.

Titie: --':l..Jj-l~-:===-----30_L.......:=.L--=--=:"=....1-_-L_----='

Date: ....

Issued as a modification of an Order ofthe Commissioner of Environmental Protection

Gar . R , Director

Engineering & Enforcement Division

Bureau of Air Management

TOWN OF WINDSOR LOCKS

MAILED CERTIFIED MAIL,

RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Certified Document No.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Scott Lindberg v. Scott Callahan

Appellate case number: 01

- 19

- 00559

- CV

Trial court case number: 19

- DCV

- 262220

Trial court: 458th District Court of Fort Bend County

On November 21, 2019, this Court issued an order directing the trial court to review documents in the unsealed clerk’s record to determine if any of these documents should be sealed

under Rule 76a. The Court extended the time for the trial court to conduct this review until January 3, 2020. On January 15, appellant filed a motion to reinstate the appeal on the active docket because the trial court has not filed a supplemental clerk’s record containing its ruling, as this Court requested.

On Januar y 22, 2020, appellee responded to appellant’s motion, and asked that this Court direct the trial court to comply with this Court’s prior order.

Because the trial court has heard the parties’ arguments concerning sealing of additional documents, as this Co urt requested in its prior order, the Court extends the deadline for the trial court to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing its order until February 25, 2020

. Appellant’s motion to reinstate the appeal and set briefing deadline is at this time d enied

.
It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

____

/s/ Richard Hightower

_____  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: ___ January 30, 2020

____
Exhibit 3.1.3

ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT  TO THE ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION  OF  PROVECTUS PHARMACEUTICAL, INC.

Pursuant to the provisions of the Revised Business Code § 78.390 1001et seq., the undersigned
corporation adopts the following amendment to the Articles of Incorporation.



| |  |                                                               
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------
| |  | Article IName                                                 
| |  | The name of the corporation is Provectus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
| |  |                                                               



Effective
the 23rd day of April, 2002.

| |  | /s/KELLY ADAMSKelly Adams
President
| |  | -----------------------------------

1

---

QuickLinks
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v George McMillan, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, rendered February 15, 1977, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. A hearing on the speedy trial issue was not necessary since the record sufficiently details the reasons for the delay in bringing defendant to trial (see *People v Williams,*56 AD2d 667). Hopkins, J. P., Suozzi, Rabin and Shapiro, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                         5

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                         JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                              MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                      4,447,915
<SECURITIES>                                                  648,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                               2,478,796
<ALLOWANCES>                                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                                14,235,096
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           22,384,069
<PP&E>                                                      3,594,390
<DEPRECIATION>                                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             26,020,826
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       2,107,224
<BONDS>                                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                               0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<COMMON>                                                      504,979
<OTHER-SE>                                                          0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               26,020,826
<SALES>                                                    10,001,220
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           10,001,220
<CGS>                                                       8,322,049
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               8,322,049
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            1,493,540
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            357,701
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                               543,332
<INCOME-TAX>                                                  193,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                           350,332
<DISCONTINUED>                                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                     0
<CHANGES>                                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                                  350,332
<EPS-BASIC>                                                       .33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                     .33



</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 842
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 842 appear at 81 FR 83688, Nov. 22, 2016.

§ 842.99 Applicable law. ( a ) *Federal preemption.* Many of the exclusions in this subpart are based upon the wording of 28 U.S.C. 2680 or other federal statutes or court decisions interpreting the Federal Tort Claims Act. Federal case law interpreting the same exclusions under the Federal Tort Claims Act is applied to the National Guard Claims Act. Where state law differs with federal law, federal law prevails.
( b ) *Extent of liability.* Where the claim arises is important in determining the extent of liability. ( 1 ) *Applicable law.* When a claim arises in the United States, its territories or possessions, the same law as if the claim was cognizable under the FTCA will be applied.
( 2 ) *Claims in foreign countries.* In claims arising in a foreign country, where the claim is for personal injury, death, or damage to or loss of real or personal property caused by an act or omission alleged to be negligent, wrongful, or otherwise involving fault of military personnel or civilian officers or employees of the United States acting within the scope of their employment, liability or the United States is determined according to federal case law interpreting the FTCA. Where the FTCA requires application of the law of the place where the act or omission occurred, settlement authorities will use the rules set forth in the currently adopted edition of the *Restatement of the Law,* published by the American Law Institute, to evaluate the liability of the Air Force, subject to the following rules: ( i ) Absolute or strict liability will not apply for claims not arising from noncombat activities.
( ii ) Hedonic damages are not payable.
( iii ) The collateral source doctrine will not apply.
( iv ) Joint and several liability does not apply. Payment will be made only upon the portion of loss, damage, injury or death attributable to the Armed Forces of the United States.
( v ) Future economic loss will be discounted to present value after deducting for federal income taxes and, in cases of wrongful death, personal consumption.
( c ) *Claims not payable.* Do not approve payment for: ( 1 ) Punitive damages.
( 2 ) Cost of medical or hospital services furnished at U.S. expense.
( 3 ) Cost of burial expenses paid by the United States.
( d ) *Settlement by insurer or joint tortfeasor.* When settlement is made by an insurer or joint tortfeasor and an additional award is warranted, an award may be made if both of the following are present: ( 1 ) The United States is not protected by the release executed by the claimant.
( 2 ) The total amount received from such source is first deducted.
[81 FR 83698, Nov. 22, 2016]