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.                  

###### Judicial Conference of the United States

# AGENCY:

Judicial Conference of the United States.

# ACTION:

Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure, notice of open meeting.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure will hold a meeting on June 22, 2021 in Washington, DC. The meeting is open to the public for observation but not participation. An agenda and supporting materials will be posted at least 7 days in advance of the meeting at:                         *http://www.uscourts.gov/​rules-policies/​records-and-archives-rules-committees/​agenda-books.*

# DATES:

June 22, 2021, 9 a.m.-5 p.m. (Eastern).

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Shelly Cox, Management Analyst, Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus Circle NE, Suite 7-300, Washington, DC 20544, Phone (202) 502-1820,                         *RulesCommittee_Secretary@ao.uscourts.gov.*

Authority: 28 U.S.C. 2073.

Dated: January 19, 2021.

Rebecca A. Womeldorf,

Rules Committee Secretary, Rules Committee Staff.

[FR Doc. 2021-01562 Filed 1-25-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 2210-55-P
- 'U of Cincinnati' of 'Extra docs March 19'
- oh-uofcincinnati-1-notlet
#### 1253.227 Patents, data, and copyrights.
Title IV Loans Negotiated Rulemaking Committee 2015

Facilitators

Facilitators Susan Podziba

Jacqueline Wilson

Federal Negotiator

U.S. Department of Education Gail McLarnon

Senior Director

Policy Development, Analysis and Accreditation Service

Non-Federal Negotiators

Community of Interest Primary Alternate

Students Devon Graves

Chair

California State Student Association

Jessi Morales

Policy Advocate

Generation Progress

Legal assistance organizations that 

represent students

Toby Merrill

Predatory Lending Practice

The Legal Services Center of Harvard Law School

Johnson Tyler

Foreclosure and Consumer Attorney

South Brooklyn Legal Services

Consumer advocacy organizations Jennifer Wang

Policy Director

Young Invincibles

Suzanne Martindale

Staff Attorney

Consumers Union

State attorneys general and other 

appropriate State officials

Samuel Levine

Assistant Attorney General

Consumer Fraud Bureau

Office of the Attorney General of Illinois

Tyler Stewart

Executive Director

Consumer Protection Division

Kentucky Office of the Attorney General

Groups representing U.S. military 

servicemembers or veterans

Matthew Randle

Chief Operating Officer

Student Veterans of America

D. Wayne Robinson

President and CEO

Student Veterans of America
Community of Interest Primary Alternate

Financial aid administrators Scott Cline

Director of Financial Aid

California College of the Arts

Clair Jacobi

Director of Financial Aid

New York Institute of Technology 

College of Osteopathic Medicine

Minority serving institutions Theresa Montaňo

Chicana Studies in Education

California State University-Northridge

Patricia Hurley

Associate Dean/Financial Aid Director

Glendale Community College

Two-year public institutions Shannon Sheaff

Director of Financial Aid

Mohave Community College

Helen Faith

Director of Financial Aid

Lane Community College

Four-year public institutions Craig Fennell

Director, Student Financial Services

Temple University

Rachelle Feldman

Assistant Vice Chancellor and Director of Financial Aid

University of California-Berkeley

Private, non-profit institutions Marian Dill

Director of Financial Aid

Lee University

David DeBoer

Executive Director of Financial Aid

Davenport University

Private, for-profit institutions Melvina Johnson

Associate Director

Financial Aid Global Products and Services

Laureate Education, Inc.

Robert Mills

President

Ohio Centers for Broadcasting, Miami and Colorado Media 

Schools

FFEL Program lenders and loan 

servicers

William Shaffner

Director Business Development & Government Relations

MOHELA-Higher Education Loan Authority of Missouri

Darin Katzberg

Senior Policy Analyst in Regulatory Affairs

Nelnet

FFEL Program guaranty agencies and 

guaranty agency servicers (including 

collection agencies)

Nancy Masten

Manager of Policy and Regulatory Administration

Great Lakes Higher Educational Guaranty Corporation

Diane Freundel

Compliance Manager

American Education Services/Pennsylvania Higher Education 

Assistance Agency

March 4, 2015
Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:158

Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 2 of 10 PageID #:159

Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 3 of 10 PageID #:160

Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 4 of 10 PageID #:161

Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 5 of 10 PageID #:162

Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 6 of 10 PageID #:163

Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 7 of 10 PageID #:164

Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 8 of 10 PageID #:165

Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 9 of 10 PageID #:166

Case: 1:12-cv-01896 Document #: 6 Filed: 04/11/12 Page 10 of 10 PageID #:167
-78.5 -78.0 -77.5 -77.0 -76.5 -76.0 -75.5 -75.0

38.5 39.0 39.5 40.0



### ★ ▲ ▲

▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 08/01 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 01 Aug 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.86 N 77.06 WMeters AGL
### SERVED: SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF TRANS TIME EXPRESS DOCKET NO. FAA-2012-1260 (Civil Penalty Action)


### NOTICE OF PREHEARING TELEPHONE CONFERENCE A Prehearing Telephone Conference is scheduled on October 26, 2016, at 2:00p.m., Eastern Daylight Time. Each party should be prepared to discuss all facts at issue. Each party shall deliver to the Judge, no later than 5:00p.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on October 11, 2016, a copy ofany documents previously provided to the other party but not the Judge. 1 Pursuant to Section 556 ofthe Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 556(c)(8), each party shall be represented by someone who has authority to negotiate concerning resolution ofall issues in controversy. The parties shall access the Conference by dialing 877-402-9753 and, whenprompted, entering the access code 4063260
. 

### SO ORDERED.

Attachment

- Service List**'r~,.·**...... ····. ,/(',/ 'j / / / I ,.(.'l'f .,.;_;.,· f.
..**~:/ ~-**  /" VI

_ ...-.::Ronnie A. Yoder ChiefAdministrative w Judge 

# c

........ /

1 Any document(s) provided pursuant to this Notice shall be contained in one ormore three-ring binders, identifiedbytabbed dividers, and listed in a table ofcontents. The partyproviding any document(s) pursuant to this Notice shall file a copy with FAADockets and serve a copy on the other party.

### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 AMENDED SERVICE LIST ORIGINAL & 

### ONE COPY

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC--430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1

### OO<f DocketNo. FAA-2012-1260 (Civil Penalty Action)

ONE COPY (COURTESY COPY VIA EMAIL ORFAX; THEN SERVICE BY

### MAIL) CameronNiakan, Respondent's Counsel 

### 10101 Grosvenor Pl. #620 Rockville, MD 20852 TEL: 202-276-4726 FAX: (None Provided) EMAIL: cn@Niakanlaw.com Charles Raley and SabrinaJawed, Complainant's Counsel 

### Enforcement Division, AGC-300 Office ofthe ChiefCounsel, FAA 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 TEL: 202-267-3357 FAX: 202-267-5106 The Honorable Ronnie A. Yoder,

Chief Administrative LawJudge 

### U.S. Department ofTransportation Office ofHearings, M-20 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2142 FAX: 202-366-7536

2 Service was byU.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

### -2-
1632.771 Non-commingling of FEHBP funds. ( a ) This section applies to contracts based on cost analysis.
( b ) Carrier or underwriter commingling of FEHBP funds with those from other sources makes it difficult to precisely determine FEHBP cash balances at any given time or to precisely determine investment income attributable to FEHBP invested assets.
( c ) FEHBP funds shall be maintained separately from other cash and investments of the carrier or underwriter. Cash and investment balances reported on FEHBP Annual Accounting Statements must agree with the carrier's books and records.
( d ) This requirement may be waived by the contracting officer in accordance with the clause at 1652.232-72 when adequate accounting and other controls are in effect. If the requirement is waived, the waiver will remain in effect until it is withdrawn by OPM. The waiver shall be withdrawn if OPM determines that the accounting controls are no longer adequate to properly account for FEHBP funds.
[52 FR 16043, May 1, 1987, as amended at 70 FR 31382, June 1, 2005]
204.7603 Procedures. The contracting officer shall consider price risk and supplier risk, if available in SPRS, as a part of the award decision. For procurement of an end product identified by a material identifier that is available as described at PGI 204.7603, the contracting officer shall also consider assessments of item risk, if available, as a part of the award decision. Offerors or quoters without a risk assessment in SPRS shall not be considered favorably or unfavorably. Contracting officers shall use their discretion in considering the information available in SPRS on item risk, price risk, and supplier risk as follows: ( a ) *Item risk.* ( 1 ) Consider item risk to determine whether the procurement of products represents a high performance risk to the Government. If an item has a high risk rating, then the SPRS item risk report will display the reason(s) an item is identified as high risk.
( 2 ) Before issuing a solicitation for the procurement of an end product identified by a material identifier that is available as described at PGI 204.7603, the contracting officer shall ensure a SPRS item risk search has been performed and shall consider any item risk warnings provided. When evaluating quotations or offers for an end product identified by a material identifier, a SPRS item risk search is required for any end product that did not have an item risk search performed prior to solicitation. If there are item risk warnings, the contracting officer shall consider strategies to mitigate risk, such as the following: ( i ) Consulting with the program office.
( ii ) Including mitigating requirements in the statement of work, as provided by the requiring activity.
( iii ) Including FAR and DFARS clauses identified in the SPRS application, as appropriate.
( b ) *Price risk.* ( 1 ) When procuring a service or an end product identified by a material identifier that is available as described at PGI 204.7603, the contracting officer shall consider price risk assessment in determining if a proposed price is consistent with historical prices paid for an item or otherwise creates a risk to the Government. Contracting officers shall not rely solely on the price risk assessment when determining prices to be fair and reasonable.
( 2 ) The contracting officer shall consider strategies to mitigate price risk, such as the following: ( i ) Not awarding to offerors or quoters with high risk price ratings unless there is a way to justify the price through additional price or cost analysis.
( ii ) Utilizing appropriate price negotiation techniques and procedures.
( iii ) Using price reasonableness or price realism techniques at FAR 13.106 or 15.4. See also 215.403-3 when making award decisions.
( c ) *Supplier risk.* The contracting officer shall consider supplier risk, to assess the risk of unsuccessful performance and supply chain risk, in award decisions. Supplier risk assessments in SPRS include quality, delivery, and other contractor performance information.
JACK BART 

98 BYRAM SHORE ROAD 

GREENWICH, Cf 06830 

Email: jackbart36@gmail.com Cell: (203) 921-6400 

6/3/2015 

US Department ofTransportation, Docket Operations 

West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140 

1200 New Jersey A venue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

RE: Request for Exemption 

To Whom It May Concern, 

Vm Certified Receipt Mail 

;iI am a "person" and hereby request an exemption to 14CFR, Federal Aviation Regulation 91.881, Civil subsonic jet airplanes weighing 

75,000 pounds or less. This regulation is in regard to stage 3 noise compliance. Effective date December 31, 2015. 

I am type rated in a Morane Saulnier MS-760 airplane. I fly several ofthese aircraft. I hold a Commercial pilot certificate # 1498832 .. 

In the docket for rule making for this regulatory change, this make and model was excluded from the FAA analysis. The docket number 

is FAA-2013-0503; Arndt. No. 91.328. 

This make and model airplane has a gross weight of8,750 pounds and thereby is a small aircraft, under 12,500 pounds. This aircraft is a 

twin engine jet powered airplane. This airplane was certified in the United States July 1958. Type Certificate number 7A3. 

This airplane is clearly listed in FAA Advisory Circular 36-3H. change 1, dated 5/25/2012, Estimated Airplane Noise Levels in 

A-Weighed Decibels. The data provided in this ACwas provided by DGAC(French Aviation Authority) as noted in the AC. The noise 

levels are within the stage 3 noise compliance requirements. The operation of these aircraft will not be in any conflict with stage 3 noise 

regulations. 

The FAA Approved Airplane Flight Manual does not contain data regarding Stage 3 compliance. The present flight manual is dated 

April1963. This exemption has no effect on safety. 

This airplane is the first Very Light Jet (VLJ) and has historical roots. These airplanes operate for personal transportation oftheir 

respective owners and also are frequently taken to "Airshows" for display to the general public. 

This new regulation takes effect December 31,2015. Exemption to this regulation is needed before this date to allow for recurrent 

training and normal operations ofthese airplanes in the National Airspace System 

Summary: An Exemption is hereby granted to Jack Bart, holder of commercial pilot certificate# 1498832, to operate Morane Saulnier 

MS-760 series aircraft to and from any suitable airports in the contiguous United States. 

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
U.S. Department of Education

Negotiated Rulemaking

Program Integrity and Institutional Quality and TRIO

February 5 - 8, 2024

Links shared in the Zoom Chat during session 2

February 5, 2024, Day 1

Description Link Provided by 

Biden can limit 

colleges’ scheme to 

tack textbook costs 

onto tuition

https://thehill.com/opinion/education/4420447-bidencan-limit-colleges-scheme-to-tack-textbook-costs-ontotuition/Carolyn Fast, Civil 

Rights

What Financial Aid 

Offers Don’t Tell You 

About the Cost of 

College

https://www.gao.gov/blog/what-financial-aid-offers-donttell-you-about-cost-collegeEmmett Blaney, 

Students/Borrowers

February 6, 2024, Day 2

Description Link Provided by 

The Cautionary Tale 

Correspondence Schools

https://www.newamerica.org/educationpolicy/reports/cautionary-tale-correspondenceschools/introduction/Barmak Nassirian, 

Veterans & Mil. 

Students

February 7, 2024, Day 3

Description Link Provided by 

Bolstering the Public 

Voice in Accreditation

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/bolsteringpublic-voice-accreditation/

Carolyn Fast, Civil 

Rights/Consumer 

When Will the 

Watchdogs Bite?

https://www.thirdway.org/blog/when-will-the-watchdogsbite

Robyn Smith

February 8, 2024, Day 4

Description Link Provided by 

Written Arrangements 

Between Title IV-Eligible 

Institutions and 

Ineligible Third-Party 

Entities Providing a 

Portion of an Academic 

Program

https://fsapartners.ed.gov/knowledgecenter/library/dear-colleague-letters/2022-06-16/writtenarrangements-between-title-iv-eligible-institutions-andineligible-third-party-entities-providing-portion-academicprogramRobyn Smith, 

Legal Aid
Outsourcing Online 

Higher Ed: A Guide for 

Accreditors

https://tcf.org/content/report/outsourcing-online-highered-guide-accreditors/Robyn Smith, 

Legal Aid

It’s Time to Make 

Repairs to Online Higher 

Ed

https://tcf.org/content/commentary/its-time-to-makerepairs-to-online-higher-ed/Robyn Smith, 

Legal Aid

668.5 Written 

arrangements to 

provide educational 

programs

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/section-668.5 Donna Mangold, 

ED OGC

February 9, 2024, Day 5

None

All links included in this document are active as of 2/9/2024

** By selecting the following link, you will be leaving the Department of Education’s (ED’s) 

website and navigating to a third-party site. This site and its contents are managed by 

organizations that may or may not have a business relationship with ED. As such, the 

Department is not responsible for the product, service, or overall website contents nor can it 

guarantee that any of the above are accessible in accordance with Section 508 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973. If you need accessibility support, please reach out to the third-party 

vendor for assistance.
19.202-6 Determination of fair market price. ( a ) The fair market price shall be the price achieved in accordance with the reasonable price guidelines in 15.404-1(b) for— ( 1 ) Total and partial small business set-asides, and reserves (see subpart 19.5);
( 2 ) HUBZone set-asides (see subpart 19.13);
( 3 ) Contracts utilizing the price evaluation preference for HUBZone small business concerns (see subpart 19.13);
( 4 ) Set-asides for SDVOSB concerns eligible under the SDVOSB Program (*see* subpart 19.14); and
( 5 ) Set-asides for EDWOSB concerns and WOSB concerns eligible under the WOSB Program (see subpart 19.15).
( b ) For 8(a) contracts, both with respect to meeting the requirement at 19.806(b) and in order to accurately estimate the current fair market price, contracting officers shall follow the procedures at 19.807.
[52 FR 38189, Oct. 14, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 43390, Oct. 26, 1988; 54 FR 46005, Oct. 31, 1989; 62 FR 51270, Sept. 30, 1997; 63 FR 35722, June 30, 1998; 63 FR 70268, Dec. 18, 1998; 69 FR 25276, May 5, 2004; 76 FR 18309, Apr. 1, 2011; 79 FR 61750, Oct. 14, 2014; 85 FR 11759, Feb. 27, 2020; 89 FR 13956, Feb. 23, 2024]
212.370 Inapplicability of certain provisions and clauses to contracts and subcontracts for the acquisition of commercial products, commercial services, and commercially available off-the-shelf items. The following provisions and clauses, not expressly authorized in law, are not applicable to contracts for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services: ( a ) FAR 52.204-22, Alternative Line Item Proposal.
( b ) [Reserved]
[88 FR 80464, Nov. 17, 2023]
Appeal No. 74-265.

#### Louis Rendine *d.b.a.*Rendine Auto Body *v.*Salvatore Carnevale *et ux.*

*Robert K. Argentieri, Harold S. Moskol,*for appellee. *Howard K. Simmons,*for appellants.

Motion of appellee, Louis Rendine d.b.a. Rendine Auto Body, to dismiss the appeal as .being interlocutory is granted.
#### UNITED STATES of America ex rel. James E. PITCHER v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA.

Civ. A. No. 70-1254.

United States District Court, E. D. Pennsylvania.

July 13, 1970.

*1330James E. Pitcher, pro se.

Ralph B. D’lorio, Asst. Dist. Atty., Media, Pa., for respondent.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JOSEPH S. LORD, III, District Judge.

Relator seeks the writ of habeas corpus on Bills of Indictment Nos. 216 and 217, Delaware County, June Sessions 1968, because the Commonwealth has failed to provide him with a speedy trial. When he filed this petition he was incarcerated in the Indiana State Prison serving a sentence imposed for burglary. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania lodged a detainer with his custodian in Indiana pertaining to the charges here at issue, and relator alleges that the Commonwealth has not made a “diligent, good faith effort” to bring him to trial within the meaning of Smith v. Hooey, 393 U.S. 374, 89 S.Ct. 575, 21 L.Ed.2d 607 (1969). Relator sought the writ in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana but his petition was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Unfortunately for relator, we are obliged to do the same under the decision in United States ex rel. Van Scoten v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 404 F.2d 767 (C.A. 3, 1968). While we are not very impressed with the merits of relator’s claim, the obvious dilemma prisoners in his position.face now that Peyton v. Rowe, 391 U.S. 54, 88 S.Ct. 1549, 20 L.Ed.2d 426 (1968), permits attacks on detainers can not be ignored. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agrees with this Circuit that jurisdiction lies in the district of the prisoner’s confinement, but has not yet passed on the corollary question whether jurisdiction lies in the sentencing state. George v. Nelson, 410 F.2d 1179, 1181-1182 (C.A. 9, 1969), aff’d, 398 U.S. 224, 90 S.Ct. 1963, 26 L.Ed.2d 578 (1970). The Fourth Circuit has held that a prisoner seeking to attack an out-of-state detainer should file the writ in the district court having jurisdiction over the state authorities issuing the detainer, even though his present custodian is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of that district court. Word v. North Carolina, 406 F.2d 352 (C.A. 4, 1969). As the case before us illustrates, uniformity must be achieved if the Great Writ is not to be frustrated by inter-Circuit squabbles over jurisdictional interpretations of the “in custody” requirements of 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241(c) (3).

Since this Circuit has so recently considered the issue, and since the Supreme Court does not appear disposed to resolve the inter-Circuit conflict, Nelson v. George, 399 U.S. 224, 228, n. 5, 90 S.Ct. 1963, 1966, 26 L.Ed.2d 578 (1970), there is no probable cause for appeal.

The writ will be denied for lack of territorial jurisdiction.

It is so ordered.
#### 1850.102 Delegation of and limitations of exercise of authority.