alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §6911. Repealed. Pub. L. 115–334, title XII, §12414(a)(1), Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4981

Section, Pub. L. 103–354, title II, §211, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3209; Pub. L. 104–127, title VII, §722(c), Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 1115; Pub. L. 107–171, title VI, §6201(d)(3), May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 419, related to transfer of Department functions to Secretary of Agriculture.

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

#### Construction of 2018 Amendment

Pub. L. 115–334, title XII, §12414(c), Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4981, provided that: "Nothing in the amendments made by this section [repealing sections 6911, 6913, 6914, 6917, 6935, 6963, 6972, and 7013 of this title] shall be construed as affecting—

"(1) the authority of the Secretary to continue to carry out a function vested in, and performed by, the Secretary as of the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 20, 2018] under any provision of Federal law other than the provisions repealed by subsections (a) and (b); or

"(2) the authority of an agency, office, officer, or employee of the Department of Agriculture to continue to perform all functions delegated or assigned to the agency, office, officer, or employee as of the date of enactment of this Act any provision of Federal law other than the provisions repealed by subsections (a) and (b)."
#### 1846.672-2 Consolidated shipments.

When individual shipments are held at the contractor's plant for authorized transportation consolidation to a single destination on a single bill of lading, the applicable DD Forms 250 may be prepared at the time of CQA or acceptance prior to the time of actual shipment (see Block 3).
#### 1652.232-72 Non-commingling of FEHBP funds.

As prescribed in 1632.772, the following clause shall be inserted in all contracts based on cost analysis.

# Non-Commingling of Funds (JAN 1991)

(a) The Carrier and/or its underwriter shall keep all FEHBP funds for this contract (cash and investments) physically separate from funds obtained from other sources. Accounting for such FEHBP funds shall not be based on allocations or other sharing mechanisms and shall agree with the Carrier's accounting records.

(b) In certain instances the physical separation of FEHBP funds may not be practical or desirable. In such cases, the Carrier may request a waiver from this requirement from the Contracting Officer. The waiver shall be requested in advance and the Carrier shall demonstrate that accounting techniques have been established that will clearly measure FEHBP cash and investment income (i.e., subsidiary ledgers). Reconciliations between amounts reported and actual amounts shown in accounting records shall be provided as supporting schedules to the Annual Accounting Statements.

(c) The Carrier shall incorporate this clause in all subcontracts that exceed $25,000 and shall substitute “contractor” or other appropriate reference for “Carrier and/or its underwriter.”

(End of clause)

[52 FR 16044, May 1, 1987. Redesignated at 53 FR 51784, Dec. 23, 1988, and amended at 55 FR 27418, July 2, 1990]
#### In the Matter of Lamont Griswold, Petitioner, v Glenn S. Goord, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, et al., Respondents.

[835 NYS2d 460]—

Rose, J.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Commissioner *909of Correctional Services which found petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

Petitioner was scheduled for conditional release from prison after serving 16 years of a 25-year sentence imposed for his convictions of attempted murder and assault when, in a recorded telephone conversation with his sister, he became angry and, referring to a named third person, said “I’ll punch his lights out.” As a result, petitioner was charged in a misbehavior report with making threats and failing to comply with telephone guidelines. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing, he was found guilty as charged and received a disciplinary penalty that included the loss of 18 months of good behavior allowance. This loss had the effect of postponing his release date. After an unsuccessful administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging the disciplinary determination.

Petitioner initially contends that his statement was an offhand remark communicated only to his sister, rather than a serious threat of violence, and it fails to support the finding that he had made a threat because it was never communicated to the person against whom it was directed. We are not persuaded. Given that the applicable rule prohibits “any threat” made “under any circumstances” (7 NYCRR 270.2 [B] [3] [i]), it is of no consequence that the clear threat of physical violence made by petitioner was never communicated to its intended target *(see e.g. Matter of Alston v Goord, 25*AD3d 852, 852 [2006]; *Matter of McFadden v Armmitage,*1 AD3d 670, 670 [2003]). In addition, petitioner’s claim that the threat was not real presented a credibility issue for the Hearing Officer to resolve *(see Matter of Alston v Goord, supra*at 852 [2006]; *Matter of McFadden v Armmitage, supra*at 670-671). Accordingly, we find that the misbehavior report, together with petitioner’s admission that he made the statement quoted above, provide substantial evidence supporting the determination of guilt *(see Matter of Alston v Goord, supra*at 852; *Matter of Hernandez v Goord,*18 AD3d 1042, 1042-1043 [2005]).

Finally, we have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contentions, including his challenges to the tier III classification of the charges against him, the Hearing Officer’s impartiality and the severity of the penalty imposed, and find them to be without merit.

Mercure, J.P, Spain, Carpinello and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.
### §8309. Veterinary accreditation program

#### (a) In general

The Secretary may establish a veterinary accreditation program that is consistent with this chapter, including the establishment of standards of conduct for accredited veterinarians.

#### (b) Consultation

The Secretary shall consult with State animal health officials and veterinary professionals regarding the establishment of the veterinary accreditation program.

#### (c) Suspension or revocation of accreditation

#### (1) In general

The Secretary may, after notice and opportunity for a hearing on the record, suspend or revoke the accreditation of any veterinarian accredited under this title 1 who violates this chapter.

#### (2) Final order

The order of the Secretary suspending or revoking accreditation shall be treated as a final order reviewable under chapter 158 of title 28.

#### (3) Summary suspension

#### (A) In general

The Secretary may summarily suspend the accreditation of a veterinarian whom the Secretary has reason to believe knowingly violated this chapter.

#### (B) Hearings

The Secretary shall provide the veterinarian with a subsequent notice and an opportunity for a prompt post-suspension hearing on the record.

#### (d) Application of penalty provisions

The criminal and civil penalties described in section 8313 of this title shall not apply to a violation of this section that is not a violation of any other provision of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 107–171, title X, §10410, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 501.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this subtitle", meaning subtitle E (§§10401–10418) of title X of Pub. L. 107–171, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 494, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of subtitle E to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 8301 of this title and Tables.

This title, referred to in subsec. (c)(1), is title X of Pub. L. 107–171, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 486. For complete classification of title X to the Code, see Tables.

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

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of the Secretary of Agriculture relating to agricultural import and entry inspection activities under this chapter to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 231, 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.

1 See References in Text note below.
- nc-unc-1-complaint
- 11-24-2119
Appeal No. 74-301.

#### The Great A & P Tea Co. *v.*Anthony P. Calise.

*Hinckley, Allen, Salisbury & Parsons, Thomas J. Hogan, Robert W. Lovegreen,*for appellee. *Anthony E. Grilli, Paul J. DiMaio,*for appellant.

Motion of appellee to affirm the decree of the Workmen’s Compensation Commission under Rule 16(g), as amended, is granted.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000033015
<NAME> ENSERCH CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          21,920
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  273,861
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    102,472
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               469,171
<PP&E>                                       4,424,290
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,896,872
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,170,466
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          595,418
<BONDS>                                        921,593
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          150,000
<PREFERRED>                                    175,000
<COMMON>                                           705
<OTHER-SE>                                     541,953
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,170,466
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               867,967
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,212,087
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,086
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              24,809
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (371,015)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (130,641)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (200,925)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (200,925)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.89)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.89)
        

</TABLE>
12.402 Acceptance. ( a ) The acceptance paragraph in 52.212-4 is based upon the assumption that the Government will rely on the contractor's assurances that the commercial product or commercial service tendered for acceptance conforms to the contract requirements. The Government inspection of commercial products or commercial services will not prejudice its other rights under the acceptance paragraph. Additionally, although the paragraph does not address the issue of rejection, the Government always has the right to refuse acceptance of nonconforming items. This paragraph is generally appropriate when the Government is acquiring noncomplex commercial products and commercial services.
( b ) Other acceptance procedures may be more appropriate for the acquisition of complex commercial products or commercial services, or commercial products or commercial services used in critical applications. In such cases, the contracting officer shall include alternative inspection procedure(s) in an addendum and ensure these procedures and the postaward remedies adequately protect the interests of the Government. The contracting officer must carefully examine the terms and conditions of any express warranty with regard to the effect it may have on the Government's available postaward remedies (see 12.404).
( c ) The acquisition of commercial products or commercial services under other circumstances such as on an “as is” basis may also require acceptance procedures different from those contained in 52.212-4. The contracting officer should consider the effect the specific circumstances will have on the acceptance paragraph as well as other paragraphs of the clause.
[60 FR 48241, Sept. 18, 1995, as amended at 86 FR 61023, Nov.4, 2021; 87 FR 24844, Apr. 26, 2022]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This financial data schedule contains summary financial information extracted
from The Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company's Consolidated
Financial Statements and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000015511
<NAME> THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                             114
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      564
<ALLOWANCES>                                        80
<INVENTORY>                                        244
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,199
<PP&E>                                          26,435
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,309
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  23,453
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,189
<BONDS>                                          4,892
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,748
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    23,453
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,382
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,411
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 151
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    815
<INCOME-TAX>                                       306
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                509
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       509
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT      10.25**

----

----

**SECURITY      AGREEMENT AMENDMENT**

**SECURITY      AGREEMENT AMENDMENT**
*Amendment*
*Secured      Parties*
*Debtor*

**WHEREAS,      **
*February      Notes*

**WHEREAS,**
*Security      Agreement*

**WHEREAS**
*October      Secured Parties*
*October      Notes*
*October      Purchase Agreement*
*October      Financing*

**WHEREAS**
* *

**WHEREAS,      **

**NOW,      THEREFORE**

----

**February      Notes**

**February      Purchase Agreement**

**Note**
**Notes**

**October      Notes**

**October      Purchase Agreement**

**Purchase      Agreement**

*[Signature      pages follow.]*

----

**IN      WITNESS WHEREOF,**

|  **ACCESS PHARMACEUTICALS,              INC.** |
|-----------------------------------------------------|
|                                                |   |
|  By:                       |  /s/ Stephen              B. Thompson |
|  Name:                                         |  Stephen B. Thompson |
|  Title                                         |  VP - CFO |

----

**OMNIBUS      SIGNATURE PAGE TO**

**ACCESS      PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.**

**SECURITY      AGREEMENT AMENDMENT**

| Print Name:  |  SCO Capital              Partners LLC |
|--------------|---------------------------------------------|
|         |                                        |
|  By:    |  /s/ Stephen              H. Rouhandeh |
|  Name:  |  Stephen H.              Rouhandeh     |
|  Title: |  Chairman                              |

----

**OMNIBUS      SIGNATURE PAGE TO**

**ACCESS      PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.**

**SECURITY      AGREEMENT AMENDMENT**

| Print Name:  |  Lake End              Capital LLC |
|--------------|-----------------------------------------|
|         |                                    |
| By:          |  /s/ Jeffrey              B. Davis |
| Name:        |  Jeffrey B.              Davis     |
| Title:  |  Chairman                          |

----

**OMNIBUS      SIGNATURE PAGE TO**

**ACCESS      PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.**

**SECURITY      AGREEMENT AMENDMENT**

| Print Name:                       |  Beach Capital              LLC       |
|-----------------------------------|--------------------------------------------|
|                              |                                       |
|  By:     |  /s/ Steven H.              Rouhandeh |
|  Name:                       |  Steven H.              Rouhandeh     |
|  Title:                      |  Chairman                             |

----
#### 1809.403 Definitions.

For purposes of FAR subpart 9.4 and this subpart, the Deputy General Counsel is the “debarring official,” the “suspending official,” and the agency head's “designee.”

[81 FR 12420, Mar. 9, 2016]
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 816 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 816

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow rollovers from 529 
                       programs to ABLE accounts.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 4, 2017

 Mr. Casey (for himself, Mr. Burr, and Mr. Van Hollen) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                                Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow rollovers from 529 
                       programs to ABLE accounts.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``ABLE Financial Planning Act''.

SEC. 2. ROLLOVERS TO ABLE PROGRAMS FROM 529 PROGRAMS.

    (a) In General.--Clause (i) of section 529(c)(3)(C) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of 
subclause (I), by striking the period at the end of subclause (II) and 
inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end the following:
                                    ``(III) to an ABLE account (as 
                                defined in section 529A(e)(6)) of the 
                                designated beneficiary or a member of 
                                the family of the designated 
                                beneficiary.
                        Subclause (III) shall not apply to so much of a 
                        distribution which, when added to all other 
                        contributions made to the ABLE account for the 
                        taxable year, exceeds the limitation under 
                        section 529A(b)(2)(B).''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to distributions after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
18.001 Definition. *Emergency acquisition flexibilities* , as used in this part, means flexibilities provided with respect to any acquisition of supplies or services by or for an executive agency that, as determined by the head of an executive agency, may be used— ( a ) In support of a contingency operation as defined in 2.101;
( b ) To facilitate the defense against or recovery from cyber, nuclear, biological, chemical, or radiological attack against the United States;
( c ) In support of a request from the Secretary of State or the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development to facilitate the provision of international disaster assistance; or
( d ) When the President issues an emergency declaration, or a major disaster declaration.
[71 FR 38248, July 5, 2006, as amended at 74 FR 52860, Oct. 14, 2009; 84 FR 19837, May 6, 2019]
J. Cherry J. 840, 841, 844 (2004); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist, Court, 113 Nev. 1343, 1344, 950 P.2d 280, 281 (1997). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.

cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge Paul D.S. Edwards Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara, LLP Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A 

### e
1803.905 Procedures for investigating complaints. ( a ) Unless the NASA Inspector General makes a determination that the complaint is frivolous, fails to allege a violation of the prohibition in 1803.903, or has been previously addressed in another Federal or State judicial or administrative proceeding initiated by the complainant, the NASA Inspector General will investigate the complaint.
( b ) If the NASA Inspector General determines that a complaint merits further investigation, the NASA Inspector General will— ( 1 ) Notify the complainant, the contractor alleged to have committed the violation, and the head of the Agency;
( 2 ) Conduct an investigation; and
( 3 ) Provide a written report of findings to the complainant, the contractor alleged to have committed the violation, and the head of the Agency.
( c ) The NASA Inspector General— ( 1 ) Will determine that the complaint is frivolous or will submit the report addressed in paragraph (b) of this section within 180 days after receiving the complaint; and
( 2 ) If unable to submit a report within 180 days, will submit the report within the additional time period, up to 180 days, to which the person submitting the complaint agrees.
( d ) The NASA Inspector General may not respond to any inquiry or disclose any information from or about any person alleging the reprisal, except to the extent that such response or disclosure is— ( 1 ) Made with the consent of the person alleging reprisal;
( 2 ) Made in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a (the Freedom of Information Act) or as required by any other applicable Federal law; or
( 3 ) Necessary to conduct an investigation of the alleged reprisal.
( e ) The legal burden of proof specified at paragraph (e) of 5 U.S.C. 1221 (Individual Right of Action in Certain Reprisal Cases) shall be controlling for the purposes of an investigation conducted by the NASA Inspector General, decision by the head of the Agency, or judicial or administrative proceeding to determine whether prohibited discrimination has occurred.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 10, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

134007 Michael F. Cavanagh 

& (45) Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 134007 

 COA: 268149 

Saginaw CC: 05-026472-FC 

ANDRE TRELL MATHIS, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 24, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to 

dismiss is DENIED. 

l0830 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 10, 2007 

 Clerk