alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### 1852.214-71 Grouping for Aggregate Award.

As prescribed in 1814.201-670(b), insert the following provision:

# Grouping for Aggregate Award (MAR 1989)

(a) The Government will evaluate offers and make award on a basis of the aggregate offers for items

[*Insert the item numbers and/or descriptions*].

The Government will not consider an offer for quantities less than those specified for these items.

(b) If this is an invitation for bids, the Government will reject as nonresponsive a bid that is not made on the total quantities for all of the items specified in paragraph (a) of this section.

(End of provision)

[61 FR 47082, Sept. 6, 1996, as amended at 81 FR 36182, June 6, 2016]
1404.804-70 Release of claims. ( a ) The CO shall insert the clause at 1452.204-70, Release of Claims, in all construction, architect and engineering, and cost-reimbursement contracts that exceed the SAT. The Release of Claims clause may be inserted in other types of contracts when the CO determines that the release is necessary to protect the interests of the Government.
( b ) Form DI-137, Release of Claims, shall be used to obtain a release of claims.
###### Editorial Note on Part 842

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 842 appear at 81 FR 83688, Nov. 22, 2016.

#### § 842.71 Settlement agreement.

Do not pay a claim unless the claimant accepts the amount offered in full satisfaction of the claim and signs a settlement agreement to that effect, in which the claimant agrees to release any and all claims against the United States, its employees and agents arising from the incident in question. Use the settlement agreement approved for use by the Department of Justice for the settlement of FTCA claims, tailored to this claim.

[81 FR 83695, Nov. 22, 2016]
ENCLOSURE 3

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION RECORD

The complete record of public participation activities is located at the Air Division of the 

Department of Environmental Quality. The department contact to access this 

information is the Director, Air Division.

The state did not receive comments on this particular revision.

TEMPLATES\SIP-REG\REG03-pc

SIP\NONATTN PLANS\2015\E14-SIP-3.DOC
### §2209f. Restriction on commodity purchase program payments

On and after October 28, 2000, none of the funds made available to the Department of Agriculture shall be used to carry out any commodity purchase program that would prohibit eligibility or participation by farmer-owned cooperatives.

(Pub. L. 106–387, §1(a) [title VII, §725], Oct. 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 1549, 1549A–32.)
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ N O . 09
- 22
- 00279
- CV

__________________ GRAND HARBOR PROPERTY OWNERS ’ ASSOCIATION , Appellant
V. EDWARD GRIFFITH, BARBARA GRIFFITH, TODD BUTAUD, AND RACHELLE BUTAUD , Appellee s

__________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 457th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 19
- 02
- 01622
- CV

__________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Before this Court issued an opinion in this appeal, Grand Harbor Property
Owners ’ Association , Appellant, and Edward Griffith, Barbara Griffith, Todd Butaud, and Rachel le Butaud , Appellees, filed a Joint Motion to Set Aside Judgment Without Regard to Merits and Remand to Trial Court. We grant the motion, set aside
the May 26, 2022 Final Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc without regard to the merits , and
remand the case to the tr ia l c ou rt for release of the supersedeas bond and for rendition2 of a take

- nothing judgment pursuant to the parties’ settlement agreement. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B)

. VACATED AND REMANDED.
PER CURIAM Submitted on January 10, 2024 Opinion Delivered January 11, 2024 Before Golemon, C.J., Johnson and Wright, JJ.
#### Sylvia Albert v. Sidney J. Albert et al.

Motion for a stay granted without prejudice, however, to the right of the plaintiff-respondent to move to dismiss the appeal on the hearing thereof. Concur — Rabin, J. P., Valente, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

** **

** **

**Certification of CEO andCFO**

**Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350,**

**AsAdopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

 

In connection with theAnnual Report on Form 10-K of Real Estate Associates Limited III (the"Partnership"), for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Steven D.Cordes, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, andStephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of thePartnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to thebest of his knowledge:

 

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

 

This certification isfurnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 12 (Thursday, January 21, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6364-6365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-01162]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

[NPS-SER-CONG-30500; PS.SSELA0303.00.1]


Minor Boundary Revision at Congaree National Park

AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notification of Boundary Revision.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The boundary of Congaree National Park is modified to include 
approximately 216.13 acres of land located in Richland County, South 
Carolina, immediately adjacent to the boundary of Congaree National 
Park. Subsequent to the boundary revision, the National Park Service 
will acquire the land by donation from The Friends of Congaree, a 
nonprofit conservation organization.

DATES: The effective date of this boundary revision is January 21, 
2021.

ADDRESSES: The map depicting this boundary revision is available for 
inspection at the following locations: National Park Service, Land 
Resources Program Center, Interior Region 2, Atlanta Office, 100 
Alabama Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303, and National Park Service, 
Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, DC 20240.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Realty Officer John C. Danner, 
National Park Service, Land Resources Program Center, Interior Region 
2, Atlanta Office, 100 Alabama Street SW, Atlanta GA 30303, telephone 
(470) 513-4301.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 54 
U.S.C.

[[Page 6365]]

100506(c), the boundary of Congaree National Park is modified to 
include one adjoining tract containing a total of 216.13 acres of land, 
more or less. This boundary revision is depicted on Map No. 178/
171,144, dated September 2020.
    54 U.S.C. 100506(c) provides that, after notifying the House 
Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to make 
a boundary revision upon publication of notice in the Federal Register. 
The Committees have been notified of this boundary revision. This 
boundary revision and subsequent acquisition will ensure preservation 
and protection of the park's scenic and historic resources.

Lance Hatten,
Acting Regional Director, Interior Region 2.
[FR Doc. 2021-01162 Filed 1-19-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-52-P
#### 1852.203-71 Requirement to inform employees of whistleblower rights.

As prescribed in 1803.970, use the following clause:

# Requirement to Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights (JUL 2023)

(a) The Contractor shall inform its employees in writing, in the predominant native language of the workforce, of contractor employee whistleblower rights and protections under 10 U.S.C. 4701, as described in subpart 1803.9 of the NASA FAR Supplement.

(b) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (b), in all subcontracts.

(End of clause)

[79 FR 43961, July 29, 2014, as amended at 79 FR 51501, Aug. 29, 2014; 80 FR 61994, Oct. 15, 2015; 88 FR 47808, July 25, 2023]
#### 1652.232-70 Payments—community-rated contracts.

As prescribed in 1632.171, the following clause shall be inserted in all community-rated FEHBP contracts:

# Payments (JAN 2000)

(a) OPM will pay to the Carrier, in full settlement of its obligations under this contract, subject to adjustment for error or fraud, the subscription charges received for the plan by the Employees Health Benefits Fund (hereinafter called the Fund) less the amounts set aside by OPM for the Contingency Reserve and for the administrative expenses of OPM, amounts for obligations due pursuant to paragraph (b) of this clause and the performance adjustment described at 1615.404-4, plus any payments made by OPM from the Contingency Reserve.

(b) OPM will notify the Carrier of amounts due for outstanding obligations under the contract. Not later than 60 days after the date of written notice from OPM, the Carrier shall reimburse OPM. If payment is not received within the prescribed time frame, OPM shall withhold the amount due from the subscription charges owed the Carrier under paragraph (a) of this clause.

(c) The specific subscription rates, charges, allowances and limitations applicable to the contract are set forth in Appendix B.

(d) Recurring payments from premiums shall be due and payable not later than thirty days after receipt by the Fund. The Contracting Officer may authorize special non-recurring payments from the Contingency Reserve in accordance with OPM's regulations.

(e) In the event this contract between the Carrier and OPM is terminated or not renewed in accordance with General Provision 1.15, RENEWAL and WITHDRAWAL OF APPROVAL, the Contingency Reserve of the Carrier held by OPM shall be available to the Carrier to pay the necessary and proper charges against this contract to the extent that the reserves held by the Carrier are insufficient for that purpose.

(End of clause)

[53 FR 51784, Dec. 23, 1988, as amended at 57 FR 14360, Apr. 20, 1992; 62 FR 47578, Sept. 10, 1997; 63 FR 55339, Oct. 15, 1998; 65 FR 36388, June 8, 2000; 80 FR 37180, June 30, 2015]
1631.205-72 FEHBP compensation for personal services. ( a ) Overtime on an FEHBP contract would normally meet the condition specified in FAR 22.103. Premiums for overtime, extra-pay shifts, and multi-shifts meeting the specified conditions shall be allowed without prior approval.
( b ) ( 1 ) The costs of compensated personal absence shall be assigned to the cost accounting period or periods in which entitlement was earned. Entitlement means an employee's right, whether conditional or unconditional, to receive a determinable amount of compensated personal absence, or pay in lieu thereof.
( 2 ) If at the beginning of the 1st year a carrier subject to paragraph (b)(1) of this section has a liability for accrued but unpaid expenses for compensated personal absences that would otherwise be allocable to FEHB contracts, the carrier may include such costs in a suspense account. The suspense account may be amortized and included in government contract costs at a rate not exceeding 20 percent per year.
[52 FR 16041, May 1, 1987, as amended at 70 FR 31391, June 1, 2005]
| A. | OBI and DSL entered into a Master Agreement dated December 15, 2010 (the “Master Agreement”); and |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| B. | OBI and DSL wish to amend the terms of the Master Agreement as set forth below. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 1.   | The first sentence in Section 6(a) is deleted and replaced with the following:  “Company will receive the Product at a mutually agreed price.” |
|----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   |  Except as expressly provided in this Amendment, all other terms, conditions and provisions of the Master Agreement shall continue in full force and effect as provided therein. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Oxygen Biotherapeutics, Inc., |   | Dermacyte Switzerland, Ltd. |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------|--------|
|                          |   |                        |   |   |   |
|  By:                     | /s/    |                        | By:    | /s/ |   |
| Name:                         |   |                        | Name:  |   |   |
| Title :                  |   |                        | Title: |   |   |
| Date:                         |   |                        | Date:  |   |   |
**Exhibit32.2**

CertificationPursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of

the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002

I,Raymond F. Lancy, Chief Financial Officer of Bridgford Foods Corporation (the “Company”),certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, that:

(1)                                 theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period endedJuly 13, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or780(d)); and

(2)                                 theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Dated: August 27, 2007 |   |   |   | /s/    Raymond F. Lancy |   |
|------------------------|--------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------|
|                   |   |   |   | Raymond F. Lancy, Chief Financial           |
|                   |   |   |   | Officer                                     |
|                   |   |   |   | (Principal Financial Officer)               |

 

----
1203.405 Misrepresentations or violations of the Covenant Against Contingent Fees. ( a ) The same procedures contained in 1203.203 shall be followed for reporting the attempted or actual exercise of improper influence, misrepresentation of a contingent fee arrangement, or other violation of the Covenant Against Contingent Fees (*see* FAR 52.203-5), except reports of misrepresentation or violations of the Covenant Against Contingent Fees shall be coordinated with DOT legal counsel for referral to the Department of Justice, if deemed appropriate.
U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE FORM

NOTE: In order to appear before this Court an attorney must either be a member in good

standing of this Court’s general bar or be granted leave to appear pro hac vice as provided for

by Local Rules 83.12 through 83.14.

In the Matter of Case Number:

AN APPEARANCE IS HEREBY FILED BY THE UNDERSIGNED AS ATTORNEY FOR:

NAME (Type or print)

SIGNATURE (Use electronic signature if the appearance form is filed electronically)

 s/

FIRM

STREET ADDRESS

CITY/STATE/ZIP

ID NUMBER (SEE ITEM 3 IN INSTRUCTIONS) TELEPHONE NUMBER

ARE YOU ACTING AS LEAD COUNSEL IN THIS CASE? YES NO 

ARE YOU ACTING AS LOCAL COUNSEL IN THIS CASE? YES NO 

ARE YOU A MEMBER OF THIS COURT’S TRIAL BAR? YES NO 

IF THIS CASE REACHES TRIAL, WILL YOU ACT AS THE TRIAL ATTORNEY? YES NO 

IF THIS IS A CRIMINAL CASE, CHECK THE BOX BELOW THAT DESCRIBES YOUR STATUS.

RETAINED COUNSEL APPOINTED COUNSEL 

Case: 1:12-cv-01228 Document #: 5 Filed: 04/04/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:13
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS

No. 47,252

#### *In re*The Complaint made against Richard L. Hilton by the State Board of Law Examiners.

ORDER OF PUBLIC CENSURE

Whereas, In a proceeding conducted by the State Board of Law Examiners to inquire into the complaint of alleged professional misconduct by Richard L. Hilton, and

Whereas, Following a full hearing as to such complaint, the State Board of Law Examiners found that Richard L. Hilton, Wichita, Kansas, was guilty of violating the provisions of DR 2-110 (A) (3) and DR 9-102 (B) (4) of the Code of Professional Responsibility (209 Kan. Ixxx, Ixxxix), and

Whereas, The State Board of Law Examiners has made a written recommendation to this Court that said Richard L. Hilton be disciplined by “Public Censure” as provided by Rule No. 207 (n) (2) (211 Kan. ix), and

Whereas, A copy of the Report, Findings and Recommendation of the Board, along with tire citation, was mailed to Richard L. Hilton by certified mail and was returned to the Clerk of the Supreme Court unopened and marked “Unclaimed,” and since more than twenty (20) days have passed since the citation was mailed, the matter stands submitted on the merits in accordance with Rule No. 208 *(c)*(211 Kan. ix), and

Whereas, Upon consideration of the record and being fully advised in the premises, the Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the State Board of Law Examiners.

It is, therefore, by the Court Considered, Ordered and Adjudged that the said Richard L. Hilton be and he is hereby disciplined by public censure and that he pay the costs of this proceeding. It is further ordered that this Order of Public Censure be published in the official Kansas Reports.

By order of the Court, dated this 26th day of September, 1973.
#### 1426.7103 The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors Utilization Report).
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

July 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 133789 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, MICHELE BOTSFORD, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 133789 COA: 272513 Macomb CC: 05-004024-NO CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF CLINTON, Defendant-Appellant,

and

CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF CLINTON BUILDING AUTHORITY, Defendant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the March 20, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

d0723 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

July 30, 2007

Clerk
#### 1307.503 Policy.

All procurement request packages submitted by program offices to initiate a procurement action for services shall contain a written determination by the designated requirements official that affirms that none of the functions to be performed in the statement of work are inherently governmental. This policy applies to all services other than personal services issued under statutory authority. If the contracting officer determines that there are substantial questions whether the work statement involves performance of inherently governmental functions, the contracting officer shall submit the matter for review by Procurement Counsel. Disagreements regarding the determination shall be resolved by the Head of Contracting Office (HCO) after consultation with counsel.
#### 15.600 Scope of subpart.

This subpart sets forth policies and procedures concerning the submission, receipt, evaluation, and acceptance or rejection of unsolicited proposals.
#### 1852.301 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses (Matrix).
#### In the Matter of Jack Cooper et al., Respondents, v. State Liquor Authority et al., Appellants.

Order entered July 27, 1960, annulling determination of appellant State Liquor Authority and remanding the matter *475for further investigation and reconsideration unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, the petition is dismissed, and the determination of the State Liquor Authority is reinstated and confirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellants. This is a proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act brought by three neighboring retail liquor store dealers, who seek to annul and set aside the determination of the State Liquor Authority approving appellant Feilbert’s application for a retail liquor store license. Feilbert had previously operated a store at another premises for 15 years, but had been required to vacate when the property was acquired for a public purpose. The action under review herein involves the Authority’s approval of Feilbert’s application to remove his retail liquor store license to premises in the area where the three petitioners operate liquor stores. Upon this record it cannot be held, as was stated at Special Term, that the Authority based its determination exclusively on the volume of sales in the neighborhood where it had licensed Feilbert to open his store or on the economic prospects of the licensees in that neighborhood. The conclusion of the Authority was that it would serve public convenience and advantage to permit the removal requested by Feilbert. Upon this appeal, limited as we are to a consideration of whether the determination of the Authority was arbitrary or capricious, we cannot say that the record leaves no scope for the proper exercise of its discretion within the statutory requisites for the issuance of licenses *(Matter of Restaurants, Longchamps*v. *O’Connell,*271 App. Div. 684, affd. 296 N. Y. 888; *Matter of John J. King, Inc.*v. *O’Connell,*280 App. Div. 852). Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, McNally and Stevens, JJ.