alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. Department of Education

Negotiated Rulemaking Public Hearing

May 30, 2013

San Francisco, CA

1 Debbie Cochrane The Institute for College Access & Success

2 Kate Zulaski Commission on Massage Therapy Accreditation

3 Robert Shireman Director, California Competes: Higher Education for a Strong 

Economy

4 Johnny Garcia Vasquez Commissioner, State of California, California Student Aid 

Commission

5 Megan Ryan Supervising Attorney, East Bay Community Law Center

6 Mary Lyn Hammer President and CEO, Champion College Services, Inc.

7 Margaret Reiter Individual

8 David Longanecker President, Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education 

(WICHE)

9 Barbara Hoblitzell (comments 

read by Nancy Coolidge)

Associate Director, Student Financial Support, Office of the 

President, University of California

10 Nancy Coolidge Associate Director, Student Financial Support, University of 

California

11 Thomas Babel Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, DeVry Inc.

12 Anthony J. Guida Jr. Senior Vice President, External Affairs, Education Management 

Corporation

13 Richard Winn Executive Director, Western Association of Schools and Colleges

14 Rigel S. Massaro Policy & Legal Advocate, Public Advocates, Inc.

15 Margie Carrington & Linda 

Williams

President & VP, California Community Colleges Student Financial Aid 

Administrators Association (CCCSFAAA)

16 Brad Hardison Financial Aid Director, Santa Barbara City College

17 Rachelle Feldman National Direct Student Loan Coalition

18 Russell Poulin Deputy Director, Research and Analysis, WICHE Cooperative for 

Educational Technologies (WCET)

19 Trace A. Urdan Senior Research Analyst -- Education, Wells Fargo Securities, LLC

20 Suzanne Martindale Consumers Union

21 Kristen F. Soares President, Association of Independent Colleges and Universities 

(AICU)

22 Zac Dillon Young Invincibles

23 Juliana Fredman Attorney, Bay Area Legal Aid

24 Alicia Hetman American Association of University Women (AAUW)

25 Armando Telles Veteran Advocate and Organizer from San Diego

26 Joe Ridout Consumer Action

27 David Marr President, Blackboard Transact

28 Dylon Busser Roots of Justice/IIRON Student Network
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:

Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules, Revised notice of open meeting.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules will hold a virtual meeting on April 8, 2021 and April 9, 2021. The meeting is open to the public. When a meeting is held virtually, members of the public may join by telephone or video conference to observe but not participate. 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.*                         The announcement for this meeting was previously published in 86 FR 3195.                    

# DATES:

April 8-9, 2021, 10 a.m.-5 p.m. (Eastern).

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Rebecca A. Womeldorf, Secretary, Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference of the United States, 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 14, 2021.

Rebecca A. Womeldorf,

Rules Committee Secretary, Rules Committee Staff.

[FR Doc. 2021-01383 Filed 1-21-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 2210-55-P
#### 1422.803 Responsibilities.

The CO shall forward matters involving the applicability of EO 11246 to the HCA for resolution. This authority is granted to the HCA without the power of redelegation.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

NICK PEARSON, FRANCISCO 

PADILLA, CECILIA LINARES, 

AUGUSTINA BLANCO, ABEL 

GONZALEZ, and RICHARD JENNINGS, 

On Behalf of Themselves and All Others 

Similarly Situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

NBTY, INC., a Delaware corporation; and 

REXALL SUNDOWN, INC., a Florida 

corporation; and TARGET 

CORPORATION, a Minnesota 

Corporation,

Defendants.

Case No.: 11 CV 07972

CLASS ACTION

Judge James B. Zagel

DESIGNATION OF LOCAL COUNSEL

Jeffrey I. Carton and Peter N. Freiberg, appearing herein as counsel for Plaintiff Richard 

Jennings pro hac vice, hereby designate the following member of the Bar of this Court as local 

counsel pursuant to Local Rule 83.15(a), upon whom service of papers may be made:

Carol V. Gilden

Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC

190 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1705

Chicago, Illinois 60603

(312) 357-0370

Case: 1:11-cv-07972 Document #: 70 Filed: 05/02/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:417
- 2 -

DATED: May 2, 2013

 BY: /s/ Peter N. Freiberg_______________ 

Peter N. Freiberg (admitted pro hac vice)

Jeffrey I. Carton (admitted pro hac vice)

DENLEA & CARTON LLP 

One North Broadway, Suite 509

White Plains, New York 10601

Telephone: (914) 920-7400

Attorneys for Plaintiff Richard Jennings

Case: 1:11-cv-07972 Document #: 70 Filed: 05/02/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:418
Exhibit 32.2

 

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

**Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code**

I, Tracy L. Morris, Chief Financial Officer of Capital Southwest Corporation, certify that, to my knowledge:

| 1. |   |   | the Form 10-Q, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 6, 2009 (“accompanied report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |   |   |
|----|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|    |        |        |                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |        |        |
| 2. |   |   | the information contained in the accompanied report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of Capital Southwest Corporation.                                    |   |   |

|                        |        |
|------------------------|--------|
| Date: February 6, 2009 |   |   | By:/s/ Tracy L. Morris |   |   |
|                        |   |   | Tracy L. Morris, Chief Financial Officer |   |   |
<PAGE>

                                                               Exhibit 13.(a)(1)

                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                                  AS ENACTED BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Ricoh Company, Ltd. (the
"Company") for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Masamitsu Sakurai,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, that:

     (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date:  June 29, 2006

                                       By: /s/ Masamitsu Sakurai
                                          ------------------------------------
                                          Masamitsu Sakurai
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer
|                              |   |                        |
|-----------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------|
|                              |   |                        |   |
| Dated:  August 16, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Barry B. Goldstein |   |
|                              |   | Barry B. Goldstein          |   |
|                              |   | Chief Executive Officer     |   |
|                              |   |                        |         |
|                              |   |                        |   |
|                              | By:    | /s/ Victor Brodsky          |   |
|                              |   | Victor Brodsky              |   |
|                              |   | Chief Financial Officer     |   |
#### 2052.214-70 Prebid conference.

As prescribed at 2014.201-670(a), the contracting officer may insert the following provision in invitations for bids which require a prebid conference:

# Prebid Conference (JAN 1993)

(a) A prebid conference is scheduled for:

Date: *

Location: *

Time: *

(b) This conference is to afford interested parties an opportunity to present questions and clarify uncertainties regarding this solicitation. You are requested to mail written questions concerning those areas of uncertainty which, in your opinion, require clarification or correction. You are encouraged to submit your questions in writing not later than * working day(s) before the conference date. Receipt of late questions may result in the questions not being answered at the conference although they will be considered in preparing any necessary amendment to the solicitation. If you plan to attend the conference, notify * by letter or telephone * , no later than close of business * . Notification of your intention to attend is essential in the event the conference is rescheduled or canceled. (Optional statement: Due to space limitations, each potential bidder is limited to * representatives at the conference.)

(c) Written questions must be submitted to: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Contracts and Property Management, Attn: *, Mail Stop T-7-I-2, Washington, DC 20555.

(d) The envelope must be marked “Solicitation No. * /Prebid Conference.”

(e) A transcript of the conference will be furnished to all prospective bidders through the issuance of an amendment to the solicitation.

*To be incorporated into the solicitation.

(End of provision)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6095

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DEVIN NEIL GUNDRY, a/k/a “Neil”,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca Beach Smith,

Chief District Judge. (4:09-cr-00063-RBS-TEM-7)

Submitted: May 28, 2015 Decided: June 5, 2015

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Devin Neil Gundry, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Bradenham, 

II, Howard Jacob Zlotnick, Assistant United States Attorneys, 

Timothy Richard Murphy, Special Assistant United States 

Attorney, Newport News, Virginia; Gurney Wingate Grant, II, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Devin Gundry appeals the district court’s orders denying

his motion for reduction of sentence and his motion for 

reconsideration. We find no abuse of direction. See United 

States v. Mann, 709 F.3d 301, 304 (4th Cir. 2013). Accordingly, 

we affirm the district court’s denial of relief. We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the material before this court and 

argument will not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Plumb, trustee, *vs.*Tucker.

A motion made March. 31st, 1879, to set aside a decree rendered in 1871, was, on its face, barred by the provisions of the act of February 15th, 1876, and was demurrable.

Statute of limitations. Before H. K. MoCay, Esq., Judge *prohac vice.*Fulton Superior Court. March Term, 1879.

Reported in the decision.

E. N. Broyles ; A. C. King ; Geo. T, Fry, for plaintiff in error.

Jno. T. Glenn, for defendant.

Warner, Chief Justice.

This was a motion to set aside a decree in equity in Fulton superior court on the grounds therein stated. A demurrer was filed thereto, which was sustained by the court, and the movant excepted. It appears from the record that the decree was rendered on the 9th day of June, 1871, and that the motion to set it aside was filed on the 31st day of March, 1879. On the 15th day of February, 1876, the general assembly enacted that from and after the passage of this act, all proceedings of every kind in any court of this state to set aside judgments or decrees of the courts, must be made within three years from the rendering of said judgments or decrees, and repealed all conflicting laws. More than three years having elapsed from the date of the above recited act before the motion to set aside the decree in this case was made, it was barred by the statute of limitations, and there was no error in sustaining the demurrer to the movant’s motion.

Let the judgment of the court below be affirmed.
#### Samuel C. Littell, as Executor of Julius Blumenfeld, Deceased, Appellant, v. Helma B. Taishoff et al., Respondents.

Order entered May 27, 1964, modifying defendants’ demand for a bill of particulars, unanimously modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, to the extent of vacating the demand as to items 1 to 9, inclusive, 18 and 19, and, as so modified, affirmed, with $30 costs' and disbursements to plaintiff-appellant. In the main the above items refer or are related to matters of record or admitted in the pleadings. The few remaining items are too insignificant to warrant the judicial effort required to isolate them from the numerous unwarranted demands. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1366 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 1366

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         July 22, 2024.
    Resolved, That the House has heard with profound sorrow of the death of the 
Honorable Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative from the State of Texas.
    Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions to the Senate and 
transmit a copy thereof to the family of the deceased.
    Resolved, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn as a further mark 
of respect to the memory of the deceased.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
(June 25, 1964)

#### Elsie Hall, Respondent, v. Gladys Hall, Appellant.

Order, entered on February 14, 1964, denying a motion by defendant for a change of venue to Livingston County, unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to respondent, but without prejudice to making an application for a change of venue to Steuben County. Concur — Botein, P. J., McNally, Eager, Steuer and Staley, JJ,
#### 1352.231-71 Duplication of effort.

As prescribed in 48 CFR 1331.205-70, insert the following clause:

# Duplication of Effort (APR 2010)

The contractor hereby certifies that costs for work to be performed under this contract and any subcontract hereunder are not duplicative of any costs charged against any other Government contract, subcontract, or other Government source. The contractor agrees to advise the Contracting Officer, in writing, of any other Government contract or subcontract it has performed or is performing which involves work directly related to the purpose of this contract. The contractor also certifies and agrees that any and all work performed under this contract shall be directly and exclusively for the use and benefit of the Government, and not incidental to any other work, pursuit, research, or purpose of the contractor, whose responsibility it will be to account for it accordingly.

(End of clause)

[75 FR 10570, Mar. 8, 2010; 75 FR 14496, Mar. 26, 2010]
**RESCINDED**

**Frequently Asked Questions**

**2000 Elementary and Secondary School Civil Rights Compliance Reports**

**This site is no longer active. Please direct any questions to the address below**

| Compliance Report Project OfficeOffice for Civil RightsU.S. Department of Education400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.Washington, DC 20202-1172Phone: 202-358-2976Fax: 202-358-2975E-mail: escr@ed.gov |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

OCR Home pageLast modified 4/4/2002 (*sad*)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND THE NOTES THERETO.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         207,264
<SECURITIES>                                   951,816
<RECEIVABLES>                                  205,481
<ALLOWANCES>                                     7,869
<INVENTORY>                                     91,943
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               955,084
<PP&E>                                         906,267
<DEPRECIATION>                                 320,100
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,226,372
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          249,951
<BONDS>                                        150,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,428
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,798,631
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,226,372
<SALES>                                        582,829
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               968,678
<CGS>                                          104,527
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  104,527
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               471,143
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 9,887   
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,010 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                147,935
<INCOME-TAX>                                    29,587
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            118,348
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   118,348
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.96
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                PROVIDENT FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

In connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
Annual Report of Provident Financial Group, Inc. (Provident) on Form 10-K for
the period ending December 31, 2004 (the Report), I, Christopher J. Carey, Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) of Provident, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

      (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


/s/ Christopher J. Carey
------------------------
Christopher J. Carey
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)


March 12, 2004


[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Provident Financial Group, Inc. and will be retained by Provident
Financial Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.]
#### Myrtle R. Maratta et al., Respondents, v. Associated Sales Analysts, Inc., Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for breach of a contract, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated May 15, 1963, which, upon reargument, adhered to its original decision granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and directing that the amount of the damages be determined upon an assessment by the court and a jury. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The contract was between all the stockholders (including the two plaintiffs) of a corporation, Royer & Roger, Inc., and the corporate defendant, for the sale to the defendant of all the stockholders’ shares in the Royer corporation. Part of the consideration was 29,585 shares of the capital stock of the corporate defendant, to be distributed amongst the selling stockholders. The provision of the contract which plaintiffs claim was breached was one requiring defendant “ to use its best efforts to cause the registration ” prior to February 28, 1962 of the 29,585 shares under the Securities Act of 1933 (U. S. Code, tit. 15, § 77a *et seq.).*It clearly appears that the defendant made no application for such registration, i.e., it did not file a registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Hence, as to the claimed breach of the contract, no issue of fact is presented. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.