alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**OPTION A (ORIGINAL PROPOSAL):**

*§602.11 - Geographic scope of accrediting activities*

The agency must demonstrate that its accrediting activities cover—are limited to - 

(a) A State, if the agency is part of a State government; 

(b) A region of the United States that includescovering at least three States thatbut fewer than 10 contiguous States or territories within the United States, in which all of the institutions, additional locations, and branch campuses it accredits are reasonably close to one another; orlocated; 

(c) The United States and other countries. 

**OPTION B:**

*§602.11 - Geographic scope area**of accrediting activities*

The agency must demonstrate that its accrediting activities cover—are limited to-- 

(a) A State, if the agency is part of a State government; 

(b) A region of the United States that includes at least three States thatin which all of the institutions, additional locations, and branch campuses the agency accredits are reasonably close to one another; orlocated; or

(c) The United States. 

**OPTION****C:**

*§602.11 - Geographic scope area of accrediting activities*

The agency must demonstrate that its accrediting activities cover—are limited to-- 

(a) A State, if the agency is part of a State government; 

(b) A regionof the United States that includes at least three States that are reasonably close to one another ; or

(c) The United States  Each of the States.  

**§600.2   Definitions.**

*State:* A State of the Union, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau. The latter three are also known as the Freely Associated States.
### Devany, Dennis 

## (OSn . From: JOHN MC GAULLEY [jmcgauly@verizon.net] 

### Sent: .Monday, February 15, 2010 3:13 PM 

### .To: ' Devany, Dennis (OST) 

### Cc: Swanson, Brian (OST) 

### Subject: Cape Air vs. Colgan C!inton Co.

. . ..' !.:: Gentlemen;' please undo the shenanigans of the Clinton County board of Legislators in cahoots with Garry Douglas, .President of. the NCC of Commerce (and possibly Senator Shumer». if no shenanigans how come Garry Douglas knew

the results before the vote? CAPE AIR is THE airline for Clinton County - with lowerfares 

### &morefrequent !'lights to name afew advantages. overlookthe usual Albany politics 

### &decide forthe.people of Clinton County. Thank you for your consideration John H. McGaulley, Private Citizen

1.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. John H. Moesel, Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed. (Appeal from order of Erie County Court denying defendant’s motion for writ of error *coram nobis*vacating a judgment of conviction rendered October 14, 1911.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
# Training Chart
#### 1301.103 Authority.

The CAR is issued under the authority of section 22 of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act, as amended (41 U.S.C. 418b), and FAR Subpart 1.3 by the Department Procurement Executive pursuant to a delegation initiating from the Secretary of Commerce.
#### 1433.106 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.

The provision at FAR 52.233-2, Service of Protest, as prescribed in FAR 33.106, shall be modified in accordance with the instructions in DIAR 1452.233-2.
U.S. Department of Education

Negotiated Rulemaking

1990 K Street, NW, 8th Floor Conference Center

Washington, D.C.

Violence Against Women Act

January 13-14, 2014, 9:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.

AGENDA

Welcome

Introductions

Overview of the Negotiated Rulemaking Process

Review and Adopt Protocols

Petitions for Membership

Overview of the Issues

Adopt Agenda

Review of Title IX

Discussion of Issues

- Key Terms and Definitions

- Counting Crimes

- Disciplinary Proceedings

- Applicable Jurisdiction

- Technical Changes

Next Steps

• Meeting 2: February 24-25, 2014

• Meeting Summary

• Other

Opportunity for Public Comment
##### 



Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO
RULES 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e),
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, E. Bonnie Schaefer, Co-Chief Executive Officer of Claires Stores, Inc. (the
Company), certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant
as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:  a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to
us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;  b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants
most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in
the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrants
internal control over financial reporting. June 10, 2004
    /s/ E. Bonnie SchaeferE. Bonnie SchaeferCo-Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7954

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RICHARD LEE EVANS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CR98-284-PJM, CA-00-2379-PJM)

Submitted: February 21, 2002 Decided: March 12, 2002

Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Richard Lee Evans, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Suzanne Skalla, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Richard Lee Evans seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of

the district court. United States v. Evans, Nos. CR-98-284-PJM;

CA-00-2379-PJM (D. Md., filed Oct. 31, 2001; entered Nov. 1, 2001).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
AO 450(Rev. 5/85)Judgment in a Civil Case

United States District Court

Northern District of Illinois

Eastern Division

M.G.S. JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

v. Case Number: 11 C 7934

Toerpe, et al.

G Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been

tried and the jury rendered its verdict.

O Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues

have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that final judgment is entered in favor of 

defendants Carolyn Toerpe, Cynthia Farenga, Adam Stern, Probate Division, Jane Louise

Stuart and The State of Illinois and against plaintiffs M.G.S. and Gloria Jean Sykes.

 Thomas G. Bruton, Clerk of Court

Date: 8/6/2012 Alberta Rone 

/s/ Alberta I. Rone, Deputy Clerk

Case: 1:11-cv-07934 Document #: 62 Filed: 08/06/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:216
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                               5
<CIK>                                   0000318835
<MULTIPLIER>                            1
<CURRENCY>                              U.S. Dollars

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       Dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            Dec-31-2000
<CASH>                                  537423
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        0
<PP&E>                                  10335735
<DEPRECIATION>                          7580584
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          3372953
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   0
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                                0
<OTHER-SE>                              0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            3372953
<SALES>                                 3109493
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        3109493
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         1378752
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     1378752
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                            1378752
<EPS-BASIC>                           0
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0


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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       9,205,502
<SECURITIES>                                 1,867,667
<RECEIVABLES>                                   51,644
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,283,837
<PP&E>                                       1,246,507
<DEPRECIATION>                                 222,887
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,273,555
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,375,654
<BONDS>                                      8,300,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,924
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,593,977
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,273,555
<SALES>                                     14,647,460
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,295,775
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,600,919
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             538,040
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,156,816
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,760,879
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,395,937
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .62
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .54
        

</TABLE>
Aviation Fuel Tax Action Plans

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) post s the following Action Plans submitted by state and local governments in response to the FAA’s Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue; Proceeds From Taxes on Aviation

F uel, 79 Federal Register 66,282, November 7, 2014). The Action Plans are pos ted as they are received. S ubsequent Action Plans will be posted as they ar e received by the

FAA . The status of FAA review s will be posted on the FAA Airports C ompliance and Management Analysis web site at www.faa. gov/airports/airport_compliance.
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 10-41088 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. EDGAR GUADALUPE HERNANDEZ-HERRERA, Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:10-CR-839-1
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, CLEMENT, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Edgar Guadalupe Hernandez-Herrera (Hernandez) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed

a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). H e rnandez has not filed a response. We h ave reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolo u s i s sue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D August 16, 20 11 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 10-41088 Document: 00511573825 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/16/2011No. 10-41088

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 10-41088 Document: 00511573825 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/16/2011
Fiscal Year 2012 Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies - RHODE ISLAND

FY 2012 Title I

LEA ID District Allocation*

4400030 Barrington School District 101,513

4400065 Bristol-Warren Regional School District 501,363

4400090 Burrillville School District 646,174

4400120 Central Falls School District 2,674,878

4400150 Chariho Regional School District 317,568

4400210 Coventry School District 644,443

4400240 Cranston School District 2,310,392

4400270 Cumberland School District 483,914

4400300 East Greenwich School District 95,168

4400330 East Providence School District 1,161,657

4400360 Exeter-West Greenwich Regional School District 226,835

4400390 Foster Elementary School District 52,346

4400420 Foster-Glocester Regional School District 112,836

4400450 Glocester Elementary School District 87,929

4400510 Jamestown School District 112,836

4400540 Johnston School District 675,851

4400570 Lincoln School District 382,711

4400600 Little Compton School District 44,204

4400630 Middletown School District 294,303

4400660 Narragansett School District 191,247

4400690 New Shoreham School District 18,612

4400720 Newport School District 865,075

4400750 North Kingstown School District 440,747

4400780 North Providence School District 836,744

4400810 North Smithfield School District 211,712

4400840 Pawtucket School District 4,791,766

4400870 Portsmouth School District 200,080

4400900 Providence School District 22,442,655

4400960 Scituate School District 177,978

4400990 Smithfield School District 187,284

4401020 South Kingstown School District 416,445

4401050 Tiverton School District 207,059

4401110 Warwick School District 1,548,746

4401140 West Warwick School District 1,052,160

4401170 Westerly School District 536,260

4401200 Woonsocket School District 4,089,401

4499999 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 2012 for school improvement activities. These 

 adjustments will reduce the actual amounts available.
#### 1852.233-70 Protests to NASA.

As prescribed in 1833.106-70, insert the following provision:

# Protests to NASA (DEC 2015)

(a) In lieu of a protest to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), bidders or offerors may submit a protest under 48 CFR part 33 (FAR Part 33) directly to the Contracting Officer for consideration by the Agency. Alternatively, bidders or offerors may request an independent review by the Assistant Administrator for Procurement, who will serve as or designate the official responsible for conducting an independent review. Such reviews are separate and distinct from the Ombudsman Program described at 1815.7001.

(b) Bidders or offerors shall specify whether they are submitting a protest to the Contracting Officer or requesting an independent review by the Assistant Administrator for Procurement.

(c) Protests to the Contracting Officer shall be submitted to the address or email specified in the solicitation (email is an acceptable means for submitting a protest to the Contracting Officer). Alternatively, requests for independent review by the Assistant Administrator for Procurement shall be addressed to the Assistant Administrator for Procurement, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546-0001.

(End of provision)

[80 FR 36723, June 26, 2015, as amended at 80 FR 75843, Dec. 4, 2015]
INSPIRE 1 User Manual V1.8 2015.9

• 2 © 2015 DJI. All Rights Reserved. Using this manual Legends
Warning

Important
Hints and Tips

Reference

Before Flight The following tutorials and manuals have been produced to ensure you to make full use of your Inspire 1. 1.Disclaimer 2.In the Box 3.Inspire 1 Quick Start Guide 4.Safety Guidelines 5.Inspire 1 User Manual 6.Intelligent Flight Battery Safety Guidelines Watching all the tutorial videos and reading the Disclaimer before flight is recommended. Afterwards, prepare for your first flight by using the Inspire 1 Quick Start Guide. Refer to this manual for more comprehensive information. Watch the video tutorials Please watch the tutorial video below to learn how to use Inspire 1 correctly and safely: www.dji.com/product/inspire-1/video Download the DJI GO app Download and install the DJI GO app before use. Scan the QR code or visit Òhttp://m.dji.net/djigoÓ to download the app. For the best experience, use mobile device with Andriod V 4.1.2 or above. Requires iOS 8.0 or later.

•
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Allan L. Bridgford, Chairman 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) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period January 21, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); 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: March 7, 2005



/s/ Allan L. BridgfordAllan L. Bridgford, Chairman(Principal Executive Officer)




17
#### 1836.7004 NASA solicitation provision and contract clause.

The contracting officer may insert a clause substantially the same as stated at 1852.236-75, Partnering for Construction Contracts, in solicitations and contracts for construction, when it has been determined that the benefits to be derived from partnering exceed the costs.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 10 (Friday, January 15, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4169-4170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00796]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Delegation of Authority No. 354-4]


Delegation of Authority to The Deputy Comptroller Charleston of 
Certain Authorities Regarding Debt Collection and Waiver of Claims

Section 1. Delegation

    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of State by the 
laws and authorities of the United States, including those set forth in 
22 U.S.C. 2651a; the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, Public 
Law 104-134 (1996); the Office of Management and Budget's Determination 
with Respect to Transfer of Functions Pursuant to Public Law 104-316 
(December 17, 1996); the Travel and Transportation Reform Act of 1998, 
Public Law 105-264 (1998); 5 U.S.C. 4108, 5379, 5514, 5522, 5524a, 
5705, 5922, and 8707; 22 U.S.C. 2671, 2716, 4047 and 4071; and 31 
U.S.C. Chapter 37, and delegated to the Comptroller by Delegation of 
Authority 354, dated April 23, 2013, I hereby delegate, to the extent 
authorized by law, authority to waive interest, penalties and costs, 
and to compromise, suspend, and terminate collection of claims against 
debtors of Department of State to the Deputy Comptroller of the 
Department of State in Charleston, South Carolina.

Section 2. General Provisions

    (a) The Secretary of State, the Deputy Secretary, the Deputy 
Secretary for Management and Resources, the Under Secretary for 
Management, or the Comptroller may at any time exercise any function 
delegated by this delegation of authority. Functions delegated herein 
may not be re-delegated.
    (b) Any reference in this delegation of authority to any act, 
executive order, determination, delegation of authority, regulation, or 
procedure shall be deemed to be a reference to such act, executive 
order, determination,

[[Page 4170]]

delegation of authority, regulation, or procedure as amended from time 
to time.
    (c) This Delegation of Authority shall be published in the Federal 
Register.

    Dated: December 14, 2020.
Jeffrey C. Mounts,
Comptroller, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2021-00796 Filed 1-14-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-37-P