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

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Review of Dietary Biomarker Development Centers (U2C).                    

*Date:*                         February 17-18, 2021.                    

*Time:*                         9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Video Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Lan Tian, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Room 7349, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 496-7050, email:                         *tianl@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: January 12, 2021.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2021-00920 Filed 1-14-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Mark Edwards, Appellant.

[835 NYS2d 309]—

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme *876Court, Queens County (Knopf, J.), rendered March 9, 2005, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the plea is vacated, the superior court information is dismissed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings on the felony complaint.

The defendant was charged, by felony complaint, with two counts of robbery in the first degree under Penal Law § 160.15 (3). He waived indictment by a grand jury and pleaded guilty under a superior court information to one count of attempted robbery in the second degree under Penal Law §§ 110.00 and 160.10 (2) (a). Additionally, the charge in the superior court information named a victim other than the two victims named in the felony complaint. As the defendant contends and the People properly concede, the conviction must be reversed, the plea vacated, and the superior court information dismissed.

The single count in the superior court information was not an “offense for which the defendant [had been] held for action of a grand jury” (CPL 195.20), in that it was not an offense charged in the felony complaint or a lesser-included offense of an offense charged in the felony complaint *(see People v Menchetti,*76 NY2d 473, 477 [1990]; *People v Quarcini,*4 AD3d 864, 865 [2004]). Attempted robbery in the second degree under Penal Law §§ 110.00 and 160.10 (2) (a) is not a lesser included offense of the crimes for which the defendant was being held, i.e., two counts of robbery in the first degree under Penal Law § 160.15 (3), because it contains an element (physical injury) that is not an element of robbery in the first degree and, therefore, it is possible to commit the greater crime “without concomitantly committing, by the same conduct,” the lesser crime (CPL 1.20 [37]; *see People v Bonds,*220 AD2d 444 [1995]; *cf. People v Miller,*87 NY2d 211, 215-216 [1995]). Even if it were a theoretically lesser-included crime, the designation of a victim in the superior court information different from the victims named in the felony complaint renders the crime contained in the information a different crime entirely. Thus, the superior court information to which the defendant pleaded guilty did not “include at least one offense that was contained in the felony complaint” *(People v Zanghi,*79 NY2d 815, 818 [1991]), and, consequently, the superior court information was jurisdictionally defective *(id.; see People v Quarcini, supra; cf. People v Menchetti, supra*at 475). This defect survives the defendant’s failure to raise this claim in the Supreme Court, his plea of guilty, and his waiver of the right to appeal (see *People v Zanghi, supra; People v*
      *877
      *Manchetti, supra; People v June,*30 AD3d 1016 [2006]; *People v Libby,*246 AD2d 669, 670 [1998]).

In light of this disposition, we need not address the defendant’s remaining contention. Crane, J.E, Krausman, Goldstein and Dillon, JJ., concur.
14.103-1 General. ( a ) Sealed bidding shall be used whenever the conditions in 6.401(a) are met. This requirement applies to any proposed contract action under part 6.
( b ) Sealed bidding may be used for classified acquisitions if its use does not violate agency security requirements.
( c ) The policy for pricing modifications of sealed bid contracts appears in 15.403-4(a)(1)(iii).
[48 FR 42171, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 1737, Jan. 11, 1985; 50 FR 52429, Dec. 23, 1985; 62 FR 51270, Sept. 30, 1997; 67 FR 6114, Feb. 8, 2002; 68 FR 43856, July 24, 2003]
#### In the Matter of Broadur Realty Corporation, Petitioner, against State Tax Commission, Respondent.

Motion for reargument denied, without costs. Present• — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.
EXHIBIT
32.1




Certification
of Principal Executive Officer


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




Pursuant
to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
officer of Mandalay Media, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does
hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





The
Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009 of the
Company (the “Form 10-K/A”) fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the
information contained in the Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.




Date: December
3, 2009




/s/
      Ray SchaafRay
      SchaafPresident(Principal
      Executive
Officer)
14.408-2 Responsible bidder—reasonableness of price. ( a ) The contracting officer shall determine that a prospective contractor is responsible (see subpart 9.1) and that the prices offered are reasonable before awarding the contract. The price analysis techniques in 15.404-1(b) may be used as guidelines. In each case the determination shall be made in the light of all prevailing circumstances. Particular care must be taken in cases where only a single bid is received.
( b ) The price analysis shall consider whether bids are materially unbalanced (see 15.404-1(g)).
[48 FR 42171, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 55 FR 25527, June 21, 1990. Redesignated at 60 FR 34738, July 3, 1995, as amended at 62 FR 51270, Sept. 30, 1997]
Fiscal Year 2018 Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies - MARYLAND

FY 2018 Title I

LEA ID District Allocation*

2400030 Allegany County Public Schools 3,278,308

2400060 Anne Arundel County Public Schools 15,319,694

2400090 Baltimore City Public Schools 62,632,793

2400120 Baltimore County Public Schools 30,632,102

2400150 Calvert County Public Schools 1,539,098

2400180 Caroline County Public Schools 1,858,442

2400210 Carroll County Public Schools 2,430,174

2400240 Cecil County Public Schools 4,041,187

2400270 Charles County Public Schools 4,007,844

2400300 Dorchester County Public Schools 2,442,199

2400330 Frederick County Public Schools 4,750,652

2400360 Garrett County Public Schools 1,181,021

2400390 Harford County Public Schools 5,282,287

2400420 Howard County Public Schools 5,461,969

2400450 Kent County Public Schools 669,660

2400480 Montgomery County Public Schools 31,765,584

2400510 Prince George's County Public Schools 38,354,098

2400540 Queen Annes County Public Schools 876,936

2400570 Somerset County Public Schools 1,727,451

2400600 St. Marys County Public Schools 3,299,053

2400630 Talbot County Public Schools 1,147,931

2400660 Washington County Public Schools 7,184,753

2400690 Wicomico County Public Schools 6,668,209

2400720 Worcester County Public Schools 2,005,753

2499999 PART D SUBPART 2 504,974

* Actual amounts received by LEAs will be smaller than shown here due to State-level adjustments to Federal Title I allocations. States adjust

 allocations, for example, to reflect LEA boundary changes or the creation of new LEAs, including charter school LEAs, that are not accounted

 for in the statutory calculations. States also are permitted to reserve, for administration, up to 1 percent of the allocations they would receive

 if $14 billion were appropriated and generally must reserve 7 percent of their allocations for school improvement. These 

 adjustments will reduce the actual amounts available.
### §1446c–1. Reduction of dairy product inventories

The Secretary of Agriculture shall utilize, to the fullest extent practicable, the authorities under the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act [15 U.S.C. 714 et seq.] (including exportation of dairy products at not less than prevailing world market prices), the Food for Peace Act [7 U.S.C. 1691 et seq.], and other authorities available to the Secretary to reduce inventories of dairy products held by the Commodity Credit Corporation so as to reduce net Commodity Credit Corporation expenditures to the estimated outlays for the milk price support program used in developing budget outlays under the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 for the appropriate fiscal year.

(Pub. L. 97–98, title I, §106, Dec. 22, 1981, 95 Stat. 1220; Pub. L. 110–246, title III, §3001(b)(1)(A), (2)(A), June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1820.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act, referred to in text, is act June 29, 1948, ch. 704, 62 Stat. 1070, which is classified generally to subchapter II (§714 et seq.) of chapter 15 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 714 of Title 15 and Tables.

The Food for Peace Act, referred to in text, is act July 10, 1954, ch. 469, 68 Stat. 454, which is classified generally to chapter 41 (§1691 et seq.) 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.

The Congressional Budget Act of 1974, referred to in text, is titles I through IX of Pub. L. 93–344, July 12, 1974, 88 Stat. 298. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 621 of Title 2, The Congress, and Tables.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Agriculture and Food Act of 1981, and not as part of the Agricultural Act of 1949 which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of the 1949 Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1421 of this title and Tables.

#### 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 Dec. 22, 1981, see section 1801 of Pub. L. 97–98, set out as a note under section 4301 of this title.

#### Dairy Program Operation Report

Pub. L. 97–98, title I, §107, Dec. 22, 1981, 95 Stat. 1220, provided that, not later than Dec. 31, 1982, the Secretary of Agriculture shall submit to Congress a report describing the strengths and weaknesses of existing Federal programs, and the consequences of possible new programs, for controlling or minimizing surpluses of fluid milk and the products thereof.
1511.011-74 Work assignments. ( a ) *Policy.* When issuing work assignments, the independent government cost estimate shall not be released to the contractor. In most cases the Contracting Officer (CO) should authorize the contractor to expend only the estimated labor hours necessary to develop the work plan and to initiate preliminary tasks which must be performed before work plan approval can be made. However, in cases where the uncertainties involved in the effort are of such a magnitude that there is no reasonable expectation that the contractor can estimate the level of effort required by the tasks, objectives, or outcomes of the requirement, the CO may provide a ceiling level of effort for the entire work assignment at the time of its issuance. In such cases, the specific uncertainties precluding reasonable estimation of the required level of effort on the contractor's part must be documented in the contract file.
( b ) *Contract Clause.* The CO shall insert the contract clause at 1552.211.74, *Work Assignments,* in cost-reimbursement contracts when work assignments are used. ( 1 ) For Superfund contracts, except for contracts which require annual conflict of interest certificates (e.g., Site-Specific contracts, the Contract Laboratory Program (CLP), Sample Management Office (SMO) contracts), the CO shall use the clause with either Alternate I or Alternate II. Alternate I shall be used for contractors who have at least three (3) years of records that may be searched for certification purposes. Alternate II shall be used for contractors who do not have at least three (3) years of records that may be searched.
( 2 ) For non-Superfund contracts, the CO shall use the clause with either Alternate III or Alternate IV. Alternate III shall be used for contractors who have at least three
( 3 ) years of records that may be searched for certification purposes. Alternate IV shall be used for contractors who do not have at least three (3) years of records that may be searched.
[77 FR 8175, Feb. 14, 2012, as amended at 78 FR 46290, July 31, 2013; 79 FR 75436, Dec. 18, 2014]
#### 14.404-3 Notice to bidders of rejection of all bids.

When it is determined necessary to reject all bids, the contracting officer shall notify each bidder that all bids have been rejected and shall state the reason for such action.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jerry S. Ruger, Appellant.

Orderunanimously affirmed. (Appeal from order of Erie Special Term denying a motion to vacate a 1958 judgment of conviction for manslaughter, first degree, as a second offender.) Present — Williams, P. J., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
EXHIBIT 31.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Peter Porath, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Federal Mortgage
Corporation of Puerto Rico, Inc.

     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

     4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

          a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

          b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

          c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date.

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

          a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; 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; and

    6. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or
in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date:  February 17, 2006


 /s/ Peter Porath
----------------------------------
Peter Porath
President, Chief Executive Officer
#### 11.203 Customer satisfaction.

Acquisition organizations shall communicate with customers to determine how well the requirements document reflects the customer's needs and to obtain suggestions for corrective actions. Whenever practicable, the agency may provide affected industry an opportunity to comment on the requirements documents.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.3


                    Consent of Independent Public Accountants


We have issued our report dated March 31, 1999, accompanying the consolidated
financial statements for the year ended December 31, 1998, included in the 1998
Annual Report of Intelect Communications, Inc. on Form 10-K. We hereby consent
to the incorporation by reference of said report in the following registration
statements:

         Form S-8, File No. 333-61333, filed August 13, 1998;
         Form S-3, File No. 333-53451, filed May 22, 1998;
         Form S-3, File No. 333-49379, filed April 2, 1998;
         Form S-8, File No. 333-03246, filed January 2, 1998;
         Form S-3, File No. 333-35841, filed December 30, 1997; and
         Form S-8, File No. 333-05918, filed December 23, 1997.



/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP


Dallas, Texas
April 2, 1999
Opinion issued December 16, 2014.

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-14-00841-CV

———————————

INFINITY CAPITAL II, LLC, INFINITY CAPITAL, LLC, LAURIE A. 

MCRAY, AND MCRAY MONEY MANAGEMENT, LLC, Appellants

V.

STRASBURGER & PRICE, LLP, Appellee

On Appeal from the 281st District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2014-32348

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellants, Infinity Capital II, LLC, Infinity Capital, LLC, Laurie A. 

McRay, and McRay Money Management, LLC, have filed a motion to dismiss the 

appeal. No other party has filed a notice of appeal, and no opinion has issued. See
2

TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1), (c). Further, although appellants failed to include a 

certificate of conference in their motion, more than 10 days have passed and no 

party has responded to the motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1(a)(5), 10.3(a).

Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f). We dismiss all other pending motions as moot. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Sharp, and Massengale.
1422.406-8 Investigations. ( a ) Labor standards investigations required by FAR 22.406-8 shall be the responsibility of the CO.
( b ) The CO's report of violations shall be submitted to the HCA, who is authorized to take the actions prescribed in FAR 22.406-8(d).
( c ) The HCA shall forward all referrals through the OIG to the Attorney General.
#### In the Matter of Abraham Schwartz, an Attorney.

Motion for reinstatement to the Bar granted. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Valente, McNally and Eager, JJ.
#### 1480.502 [Reserved]