alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                            4383
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     8639
<ALLOWANCES>                                       250
<INVENTORY>                                      17840
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 31361
<PP&E>                                           74228
<DEPRECIATION>                                   46432
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   68242
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             7602
<BONDS>                                          21000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        442
<COMMON>                                          1026
<OTHER-SE>                                       34785
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     68242
<SALES>                                          17718
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 17718
<CGS>                                            14154
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2140
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    59
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 205
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   1428
<INCOME-TAX>                                       597
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                831
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       831
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .85
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .82
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
applicable SEC Form and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          13,549
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,452
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,502
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                19,001
<PP&E>                                          19,655
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,506
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  30,134
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,327
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,461
<OTHER-SE>                                      17,652
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    30,134
<SALES>                                         14,216
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,216
<CGS>                                            8,842
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,842
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,647
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   800
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (470)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (603)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (18)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (585)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (585)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.09)


</TABLE>
### §1444. Photographs; number

(a) Three identical photographs of the applicant shall be signed by and furnished by each applicant for naturalization or citizenship. One of such photographs shall be affixed by the Attorney General to the original certificate of naturalization issued to the naturalized citizen and one to the duplicate certificate of naturalization required to be forwarded to the Service.

(b) Three identical photographs of the applicant shall be furnished by each applicant for—

(1) a record of lawful admission for permanent residence to be made under section 1259 of this title;

(2) a certificate of derivative citizenship;

(3) a certificate of naturalization or of citizenship;

(4) a special certificate of naturalization;

(5) a certificate of naturalization or of citizenship, in lieu of one lost, mutilated, or destroyed;

(6) a new certificate of citizenship in the new name of any naturalized citizen who, subsequent to naturalization, has had his name changed by order of a court of competent jurisdiction or by marriage; and

(7) a declaration of intention.

One such photograph shall be affixed to each such certificate issued by the Attorney General and one shall be affixed to the copy of such certificate retained by the Service.

(June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title III, ch. 2, §333, 66 Stat. 253; Pub. L. 101–649, title IV, §407(c)(14), (d)(11), Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 5041, 5042; Pub. L. 103–416, title II, §219(w), Oct. 25, 1994, 108 Stat. 4318.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1994—Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 103–416 substituted "1259" for "1259(a)".

1990—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 101–649 substituted "applicant" for "petitioner" after "by each", and "Attorney General" for "clerk of the court".

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

#### Effective Date of 1994 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 103–416 effective as if included in the enactment of the Immigration Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101–649, see section 219(dd) of Pub. L. 103–416, set out as a note under section 1101 of this title.

#### Abolition of Immigration and Naturalization Service and Transfer of Functions

For abolition of Immigration and Naturalization Service, transfer of functions, and treatment of related references, see note set out under section 1551 of this title.
**A r c h i v e d   I n f o r m a t i o n**
**Applying Federal Civil Rights Lawsto Public Charter Schools**

**Table of Contents**

> 
**Introduction**

> 
**Background**

> 
**Responsibilities for Civil Rights Compliance**

> 
**Recruitment and Admissions**

> 
**Schools Affected by Desegregation Plans or Court Orders**

> 
**Selection of Facilities to Provide Access to Students with Disabilities**

> 
**Educating Students Who Are Limited-English Proficient**

> 
**Educating Students with Disabilities**

> 
**Endnotes**

-###-*Last Updated -- June 9,2000 (mw)*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF FAIR GROUNDS CORPORATION FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD
ENDED JANUARY 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,234
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,079
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        173
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,847
<PP&E>                                          52,067
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,392
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  50,088
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,155
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,525
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,365
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    50,088
<SALES>                                         12,056
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,500
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,578
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,161
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  10
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,766
<INCOME-TAX>                                       653
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,112
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    123
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,235
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.64
        

</TABLE>
- 00001.TIF
- 00002.TIF
- 00003.TIF
- 00004.TIF
- 00005.TIF
- 00006.TIF
- 00007.TIF
- 00008.TIF
- 00009.TIF
- 00010.TIF
- 00011.TIF
- 00012.TIF
- 00013.TIF
- 00014.TIF
- 00015.TIF
- 00016.TIF
- 00017.TIF
- 00018.TIF
- 00019.TIF
- 00020.TIF
- 00021.TIF
- 00022.TIF
- 00023.TIF
- 00024.TIF
- 00025.TIF
- 00026.TIF
#### 1823.7101 Contract clause.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.223-71, Authorization for radio Frequency Use, in solicitations and contracts calling for developing, producing, constructing, testing, or operating a device for which a radio frequency equipment authorization is required.

[80 FR 12939, Mar. 12, 2015]
| 1)     |   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and                            |
|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                 |
| 2)     |   | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |

| Dated  August 12, 2010 |   |   |   | /s/  Greggory Schneider                                 |   |
|----------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                             |   |   |   | Greggory SchneiderChief Financial and Principal Financial Officer |
### Part II—Admission Qualifications for Aliens; Travel Control of Citizens and Aliens
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert L. Verstreate, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The questions presented may not be raised upon a direct appeál from a judgment of conviction. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court convicting defendant of grand larceny, second degree.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Noonan and Del Vecehio, JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0168

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

KEVIN BRAY,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including September 13, 2023, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 4 2023

08/04/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0168
### §918a. Energy generation, transmission, and distribution facilities efficiency grants and loans in rural communities with extremely high energy costs

#### (a) In general

The Secretary, acting through the Rural Utilities Service, may—

(1) in coordination with State rural development initiatives, make grants and loans to persons, States, political subdivisions of States, and other entities organized under the laws of States to acquire, construct, extend, upgrade, and otherwise improve energy generation, transmission, or distribution facilities serving communities in which the average residential expenditure for home energy is at least 275 percent of the national average residential expenditure for home energy (as determined by the Energy Information Agency using the most recent data available);

(2) make grants and loans to the Denali Commission established by the Denali Commission Act of 1998 (42 U.S.C. 3121 note; Public Law 105–277) to acquire, construct, extend, upgrade, and otherwise improve energy generation, transmission, or distribution facilities serving communities described in paragraph (1); and

(3) make grants to State entities, in existence as of November 9, 2000, to establish and support a revolving fund to provide a more cost-effective means of purchasing fuel where the fuel cannot be shipped by means of surface transportation.

#### (b) Authorization of appropriations

#### (1) In general

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as are necessary for each subsequent fiscal year.

#### (2) Limitation on planning and administrative expenses

Not more than 4 percent of the amounts made available under paragraph (1) may be used for planning and administrative expenses.

(May 20, 1936, ch. 432, title I, §19, as added Pub. L. 106–472, title III, §301, Nov. 9, 2000, 114 Stat. 2069.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Denali Commission Act of 1998, referred to in subsec. (a)(2), is title III of div. C of Pub. L. 105–277, Oct. 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681–637, which is set out as a note under section 3121 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.
### **CHAPTER 4—FREEDMEN**
1815.606 Agency procedures. (NASA supplements paragraphs (a) and (b)) ( a ) NASA will not accept for formal evaluation unsolicited proposals initially submitted to another agency or to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) without the offeror's express consent.
[63 FR 9954, Feb. 27, 1998, as amended at 69 FR 21764, Apr. 22, 2004]
18.205 Resources. ( a ) *National Response Framework.* The National Response Framework (NRF) is a guide to how the Nation conducts all-hazards response. This key document establishes a comprehensive, national, all-hazards approach to domestic incident response. The Framework identifies the key response principles, roles and structures that organize national response. It describes how communities, States, the Federal Government, the private-sector, and nongovernmental partners apply these principles for a coordinated, effective national response. It also describes special circumstances where the Federal Government exercises a larger role, including incidents where Federal interests are involved and catastrophic incidents where a State would require significant support. The NRF is available at *https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/117791 ”*.
( b ) *OFPP Guidelines.* The Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) “Emergency Acquisitions Guide” is available at *https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/assets/procurement_guides/emergency_acquisitions_guide.pdf*.
[71 FR 38248, July 5, 2006, as amended at 72 FR 46344, Aug. 17, 2007; 74 FR 52860, Oct. 14, 2009; 76 FR 14572, Mar. 16, 2011. Redesignated at 81 FR 30439, May 16, 2016; 83 FR 42573, Aug. 22, 2018; 85 FR 40076, July 2, 2020; 87 FR 24844, Apr. 26, 2022]
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-50641

Conference Calendar

 

LUCRECIA LYNN MONROE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

LINDA AMENT, Senior Warden; E. CALDWELL, Building Major,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-96-CV-472

- - - - - - - - - -

December 9, 1998

Before DAVIS, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Lucrecia Lynn Monroe, Texas prisoner #422039, appeals from

the dismissal of her prisoner’s civil rights action as frivolous

and for failure to state a claim. Monroe contends that the

district court erred by dismissing her complaint. She argues

that prison officials failed to protect her despite knowing that

she and her cellmate were likely to fight.

A prisoner who seeks damages in an action that would

undermine the validity of a disciplinary proceeding that results 
No. 98-50641

-2-

in the loss of good-conduct time must obtain the invalidation of

the verdict from the disciplinary proceeding before she has a

cause of action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Edwards v.

Balisok, 520 U.S. 641, 117 S. Ct. 1584, 1588-89 (1997). Monroe’s

disciplinary report indicates that she lost 30 days’ good-conduct

time and her grievance forms indicate that she has failed to

obtain the invalidation of the disciplinary proceeding in which

she was found guilty of fighting with Rose. R. 16, 21-28. 

Monroe has no cause of action for damages.

Monroe’s appeal is without arguable merit and therefore is

frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). 

We caution Monroe that future frivolous appeals, even appeals in

which she is not proceeding in forma pauperis (IFP)(which Monroe

is barred from doing pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) unless she

is under imminent danger of serious physical harm), may result in

sanctions, including monetary sanctions, against her. To avoid

the imposition of sanctions, Monroe is urged to review any

pending appeals and to withdraw any that are frivolous.

APPEAL DISMISSED. SANCTIONS WARNING IMPOSED.
#### 1837.101 Definitions.

*Pension portability* means the recognition and continuation in a successor service contract of the predecessor service contract employees' pension rights and benefits.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE ANN ARBOR, MI 48105
- 2498
OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION November 22, 2010 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Meeting with the A lliance of Automobile Manufacturers Representatives,

October 20 , 2010 FROM: Chris Nevers

Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division TO: EPA Docket # EPA
- HQ
- OAR
- 2009
- 0 865 This memo documents a meeting held on Wednesday , October 20, 2010 between representatives of General Motors and EPA to discuss EPA’s proposal “Revision to Motor Vehicle Fuel Economy L abel”. The meeting attendees from the Alliance included Giedrius Ambrozaitis, Tony D’Ambrosi, Rajinder Dhatt, Steve Fornetti, Dan Frakes, Ross Gatz ke, Matthew Kevnick, Ed Kulik, Will Meschievitz, Donald Nagy, Jessica Robinson, Joe Supina, Alex Travis, Sahsi Velnati, and Mahmoud Yassine, , and from EPA included Li nc Wehrly and Chris Nevers
. The discussion topics included plug in hybrid range determin ation and fuel econom y testing procedures and calculations. The Alliance requested clarification on the above topics to better comment on the proposal.
#### STATE v. LACKEY

No. 461P97

Case below: 127 N.C.App. 398

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 November 1997.
Fiscal Year 2015 Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies - DELAWARE

FY 2015 Title I

LEA ID District Allocation*

1000080 Appoquinimink School District 855,172

1001240 Brandywine School District 2,489,429

1000180 Caesar Rodney School District 2,584,440

1000170 Cape Henlopen School District 1,642,597

1000190 Capital School District 3,554,501

1000200 Christina School District 8,753,321

1000230 Colonial School District 4,961,179

1000270 Delmar School District 327,874

1000680 Indian River School District 3,811,011

1000790 Lake Forest School District 1,050,601

1000810 Laurel School District 888,720

1001080 Milford School District 1,527,669

1001300 Red Clay Consolidated School District 6,759,856

1001530 Seaford School District 2,957,582

1001620 Smyrna School District 833,073

1001850 Woodbridge School District 1,356,256

1099999 PART D SUBPART 2 0

* 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 4 percent in fiscal year 2015 for school improvement activities. These 

 adjustments will reduce the actual amounts available.
New Program Approval

ED has requested proposals relating to the approval of new Gainful Employment programs.  It has

requested that such proposals assist it in narrowing the scope of new programs to be subject to such

approval.   

As has been discussed in our in‐person sessions and at our telephonic session, most institutions offering

GE programs are subject to multiple sources of program approval and oversight – by their accrediting

bodies, state licensing agencies and, in many cases, by the Department itself, through the means of

Provisional Program Participation Agreements (“PPPA”).  Many of these accrediting bodies and many of

the state licensing agencies apply a rigorous standard of review to programs, evaluating their academic

quality, the resources allocated to support students, and the demand for such programs.  To be sure,

some states are less rigorous than others, providing little to no oversight of new programs offered

within their jurisdictions.  However, for multistate and online institutions, new programs must be

developed to satisfy the requirements of the most rigorous oversight entity, notwithstanding the more

permissive requirements of others.   

Any GE program approval regimen to be developed by ED should take into account that dynamic matrix

of program approval for many institutions, requiring Departmental approval only in circumstances

where an institution is unable to demonstrate that its programs are subject to a rigorous approval

process prior to implementation.  Such an approach would have the advantage of 1) ensuring rigorous

review of all new GE programs, 2) minimizing duplicative or conflicting requirements for institutions, 3)

minimizing the substantial burden on the Department of reviewing large numbers of proposed GE

programs, and 4) minimizing the Department’s involvement in the program of instruction of educational

institutions and preserving the integrity of each sector’s role in the so‐called “triad” of higher education

oversight.

Proposal:

1) If an institution can demonstrate that a new program has already been substantively reviewed

and approved by any state or any of the institution’s accreditors, then the new program would

not be required to be separately approved by the Department;

2) If an institution’s programs are required to be reviewed and approved by ED pursuant to a PPPA,

then the approval procedures employed  by ED in that process would be sufficient for GE

program approval purposes, and no further or additional ED review process would apply;

3) In the event that all of an institution’s programs pass the GE metric(s) (however defined) for two

consecutive years, the institution’s new programs shall be exempt from any ED program

approval process, notwithstanding 1) and 2) above.