alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BOTH
THE DECEMBER 31, 1998 BALANCE SHEET AND STATEMENT OF INCOME AND EXPENSES
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000711512
<NAME> AMERICAN REPUBLIC REALTY FUND I
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         146,358
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      17,342,394
<DEPRECIATION>                               9,702,703
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,426,306
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     10,675,051
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,030,013)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,426,306
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,614,696
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,024,869
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             845,225
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (194,723)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (17.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

KIMBERLY GOODMAN, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-5

)

SEAN GOODMAN, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed September 21, 2018.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for

Lee County; John S. Carlin,

Judge.

Kimberly Goodman, pro se.

Bernard T. King of Rubinstein, Holz &

King, P.A., Fort Myers, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

KHOUZAM, and LUCAS, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
**U.S. Department of Education**

**Retrospective Review Plan Report**

**January 14, 2013**

**U.S. Department of Education**

**Retrospective Review Plan Report**

**January 14, 2013**

The U.S. Department of Education (ED or the Department) submits this report in response to the President’s Executive Order 13610, “Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens,” (EO) directing agencies to report to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) on the status of their retrospective review efforts.  The EO directs agencies to invite comments from the public on a regular basis about regulations in need of retrospective review, including appropriate modifications to regulations.  The EO also directs agencies, in implementing and revising their retrospective review plans, to give priority to those initiatives that will produce significant quantifiable monetary savings or significant quantifiable reductions in paperwork burden while protecting public health, welfare, safety, and the environment and to give special consideration to those initiatives that would reduce unjustified regulatory burden on small businesses.  In accordance with the EO, the Department is also including in this report (Items 8-9) a description of two initiatives (previously reported in the Department’s September 10, 2012, report) that are anticipated to produce significant quantifiable reductions in paperwork and reporting burdens. 

**Retrospective Review**

**Paperwork and Reporting Burden Initiatives**

1

9
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
August 7, 2008  ("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: August 7, 2008                By: /s/ Tracy L. Morris
      --------------                    ----------------------------------------
                                        Tracy L. Morris, Chief Financial Officer
Search HelpMore Search Options
Search 
EERE Information Center
Printable VersionArchives
Previous issues of Building E2 News are available here, listed by publication date. You can also view the current issue.
- Spring   2010 
- Summer   2010 
Printable Version- Buildings E2   News Home
- Archives 
- Subscribe 

Building Technologies Program Home | EERE Home | U.S. Department of EnergyWebmaster | Web Site Policies | Security & Privacy | USA.gov

Content Last Updated: May 11, 2010
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

In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Lubys, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended November 23, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Christopher J. Pappas, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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: December 27, 2011 |  | By: |  | /s/ Christopher J. Pappas                                          
|                        |  |     |  | Christopher J. Pappas                                              
|                        |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Joseph M. Squeri, the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Federal Realty Investment Trust (the Company), has executed this certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and
Exchange Commission of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 (the Report). The undersigned hereby certifies 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|              |  |  |  |                                                                 
|------------- |  |  |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|              |  | 
|July 30, 2008 |  |  |  | /s/ JOSEPH M. SQUERI                                            
|              |  |  |  | Joseph M. Squeri,                                               
|              |  |  |  | Executive Vice President and                                    
|              |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Accounting Officer)
#### David Sedrish et al., Appellants, v. Nathan Cooperstein et al., Respondents.

In an action based on an alleged breach of contract, plaintiffs, as assignees under the contract, appeal: (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 19, 1959, dismissing their complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 106, subd. 4); and (2) from the judgment of said court, entered May 25, 1959, upon said order. Order and judgment affirmed, with one bill of $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.
### Richard K. 

### Simon, Esq. 1700 Decker School Lane Malibu, CA 90265 (310) 503-7286**rsimon3~ilverizon.net**



### Office of the Chief Counsel 

# RECEIVED MAY 1 3 

## 2015 PART 16 DOCKETS



### Attention: FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket AGC-610 Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Ave. S.W. Washington D.C. 20591 May 13,2016



### Re: Motion of Justice Aviation, Inc. to Withdraw as a Complainant (Docket No. FAA-16-16-02) Mark Smith, Kim Davidson Aviation, Inc., Bill'sAir Center, Inc., Inc.,justiceAviation, Inc., National BusinessAviation Association, Inc., and Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, Inc. v. City of Santa Monica, California Complainant justice Aviation, Inc. hereby moves to withdraw as a complainant in the aboveentitled Part 16 proceeding. This motion is based on a settlement agreement betweenjustice Aviation Inc. and Respondent City of Santa Monica, California in separate and unrelated litigation, and is required by the terms of that agreement Counsel for Respondent advises thatRespondent supports this motion. This motion is brought by Complainant justice Aviation, Inc. alone, and does not affect the claims of any other parties in this proceeding. Respectfully submitted,

RichardK:simo;;:ES(;, 1700 Decker School Lane Malibu, CA 90265 310-503-7286 rsimon3 @verizon.net

### Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that I have this day caused the foregoing to be served on the following persons by first-class mail with a courtesy copy by electronic mail:

Rick Cole City Manager City of Santa Monica 1685 Main Street, Room 209 Santa Monica, CA 90401 1_nanager(iiJ smgov.net Martin Pastucha Director of Public Works City of Santa Monica 1685 Main Street, Room 116 Santa Monica, CA 90401 martin.pastu cha(iiJ s mgov. net

Nelson Hernandez Senior Advisor to the City Manager on Airport Affairs Airport Administration Building 3223 Donald Douglas Loop South Santa Monica, CA 90405 

### neIs on.hern andez(iiJ smgo v. net Dated this 13th day of May, 2016.

Richard K Simon, Esq., 1700 Decker School Lane Malibu, CA 90265 310-503-7286 rsimon 3 (iiJverizon.net Marsha Moutrie, Esq. City Attorney City of Santa Monica 1685 Main Street, Room 310 Santa Monica, CA 90401 marsha.m ou trie(alsmgov.net Stelios Makrides Airport Manager City of Santa Monica Airport Administration Building 3223 Donald Douglas Loop South Santa Monica, CA 90405 stelios.makrides(alsmgoy.net
Scott Lewis, Esq. Partner Anderson & Kreiger LLP One Canal Park, Suite 200 Cambridge, MA 02141
s Iewi s@ anderspnkre ige r. com
#### 204.1670 Cross reference to Federal Procurement Data System.

Detailed guidance on mapping PIID and supplementary PIID numbers stored in the Electronic Data Access system to data elements reported in the Federal Procurement Data System can be found in PGI 204.1670.

[81 FR 9785, Feb. 26, 2016, as amended at 84 FR 48510, Sept. 13, 2019]
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES 

July 13, 2020 

Honorable Daniel French, Ed.D. 

Secretary 

Vermont Agency of Education 

1 National Life Drive, Davis 5 

Montpelier, Vermont 05620 

daniel.french@vermont.gov 

Dear Secretary French: 

This letter grants final approval under Section 421(b) of the General Education Provisions Act 

for grant award H027A180098 and H173A180106. 

The Department received your June 11, 2020 request on behalf of the Vermont Agency of

Education for a waiver extending the period of availability for Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2018 

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B grant award funds. 

With this approval, the FFY 2018 IDEA Part B grant award funds will be available for obligation 

through September 30, 2021 and may be liquidated through December 30, 2021. 

Please contact your Office of Special Education Programs State Lead, Marion Crayton, at 

Marion.Crayton@ed.gov if you have any questions. 

Sincerely, 

/s/

Mark Schultz 

Commissioner, Rehabilitation Services Administration.

Delegated the authority to perform the functions and duties 

of the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services.

cc: State Director 

400 MARYLAND AVE. S.W., WASHINGTON, DC 20202-2600 

www.ed.gov 

The Department of Education’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness 

by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
Case: 1:11-cv-07850 Document #: 31-1 Filed: 09/11/12 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:112
Case: 1:11-cv-07850 Document #: 31-1 Filed: 09/11/12 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:113
Case: 1:11-cv-07850 Document #: 31-1 Filed: 09/11/12 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:114
Case: 1:11-cv-07850 Document #: 31-1 Filed: 09/11/12 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:115
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

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

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

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

November 20, 2012

h1113

Order 

November 20, 2012

144758

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144758

COA: 304011

Wayne CC: 04-001116-FC

TRACY BARNES,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 16, 2011 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant’s 

motion for relief from judgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).

HATHAWAY, J., not participating. Justice Hathaway recuses herself and will not 

participate in this case as she was the presiding trial court judge. See MCR 2.003(B).
Exhibit
32





Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





(18
U.S.C.  1350)








Persuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.  1350) the
undersigned General Partners of TASA Products Limited, a Washington limited
partnership (the "Company"), do hereby certify, to the best of such General
Partner's knowledge and belief, that:





1.  The
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the "Form 10-K)
of the Company 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 Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of  operations of the
Company.








/s/MICHEL
      E.  MAES
              /s/JAMES
      R.  STEFFEYMichel
      E.  Maes
              James
      R.  SteffeyCo-General
      Partner
              Co-General
      PartnerDate:
      3-11-09
              Date:
      3-11-09
- wa-univofwash-1-complaint
- '10242040 Recipient Notification Letter' of '24-00447-F Seattle'
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.                  

###### Surface Transportation Board

The Surface Transportation Board has received a request from the Association of American Railroads (WB21-03—1/6/21) for permission to use data from the Board's 2019 Masked Carload Waybill Sample along with continued access to previously received datasets. A copy of this request may be obtained from the Board's website under docket no. WB21-03.

The waybill sample contains confidential railroad and shipper data; therefore, if any parties object to these requests, they should file their objections with the Director of the Board's Office of Economics within 14 calendar days of the date of this notice. The rules for release of waybill data are codified at 49 CFR 1244.9.

*Contact:*                     Alexander Dusenberry, (202) 245-0319.                

Aretha Laws-Byrum,

Clearance Clerk.

[FR Doc. 2021-00433 Filed 1-11-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915-01-P
Income Driven Repayment (IDR) Notification Pilots

On March 10, President Obama announced a series of actions designed to help student loan borrowers 

in a Student Aid Bill of Rights, including the development and implementation of behaviorally designed 

pilots to identify the most effective ways to communicate with borrowers to maximize successful 

borrower repayment. In an effort to improve communication to borrowers in IDR plans and ensure a 

smooth, on-time renewal process, Federal Student Aid (FSA) and the White House Social and Behavioral 

Sciences Team (SBST) are collaborating on a series of Income-Driven Repayment Plan Notification Pilots, 

scheduled to run from April 2015 through September 2015. 

During the first session of the negotiated rulemaking on expanding and targeting the benefits of Pay As 

You Earn, dated March 23, 2015 – March 25, 2015, several non-Federal negotiators on the committee 

asked if the communications borrowers receive before renewing their Income-Driven Repayment (IDR) 

plans could be revised to improve their effectiveness. 

The first IDR Notification Pilot will take place during April 2015, for cohorts of borrowers whose IDR 

anniversary dates occur during the month of July. During this initial pilot, FSA and the SBST will develop 

communications to be sent to borrowers via e-mail that supplement the regulatorily required 

communications that servicers already send to borrowers. These communications will remind 

borrowers to renew their Income Driven-Repayment Plan income documentation and family size. Emails from the Department of Education will notify borrowers that they should have received similar 

correspondence from their servicer and will provide a direct link into the StudentLoans.gov IncomeDriven Repayment Plan application. 

The next phase of the IDR Notification Pilot will occur over two IDR renewal cycles. FSA will require that 

specific Federal loan servicers with large IDR loan portfolios to suppress their notification process for 

borrowers whose IDR anniversary dates occur in August and September 2015. During this time, FSA will 

send the regulatorily required IDR notifications and test a variety of messages to assess the impact of 

the communication and the influence of e-mails sent from a Department of Education e-mail address 

(e.g., donotreply@studentloans.gov), as opposed to a loan servicer e-mail address, on borrower IDR 

renewal rates.
----

----

| GENENTECH,      INC. |
|----------------------|
| By:                  |  /s/      David Ebersman |   | And      By: |  /s/      Denise Smith-Hams |
| Title:          |  Executive      Vice President andChief      Financial Officer |   | Title: |  Vice      President Human Resources |
| Dated:               |   9/1/06 |   | Dated: |   9/1/06 |

----
**Issue Paper 7**

**Session 2: February 17-19, 2016**

**Issue:**Revise the Direct Consolidation Loan regulations to allow for the consolidation of Nurse Faculty Loans. 

**Statutory cite:**§§428C(a)(4)(E) and 455(g) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended 

**Regulatory cite:**34 CFR 685.220(b)(21)

**Summary of change:**

The change would revise 34 CFR 685.221(b)(21) to reflect the statutory language in section 428(C)(a)(4)(E) of the HEA, which provides that loans made under “part E of title VIII of the Public Health Service Act [42 USC 297a et seq.]” may be consolidated into a Direct Consolidation Loan. Loans made under part E of title VIII of the Public Health Service Act include both Nursing Student Loans and Nurse Faculty Loans.

**Changes:** See regulatory text below.

**§685.220 Consolidation.**

(a) * * *

(b) *Loans eligible for consolidation.* The following loans may be consolidated into a Direct Consolidation Loan:

*  *  *

(21) Nursing loans made under part E of title VIII of the Public Health Service Act.

*  *  *
#### David Reed et al., Respondents, v. Village of Larchmont, Respondent, and A. A. Wyn, Inc., et al., Intervenors-Defendants-Appellants.

In an action for a declaratory judgment that certain uses of real property owned by the plaintiffs do not violate the Zoning Ordinance of the defendant village, in which the village interposed a defense and counterclaim for a declaration that such uses do violate the Zoning Ordinance and for an injunction against such uses, the owners of land adjacent to and in the vicinity of the subject property appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered January 25, 1963, as denied their motion to intervene in the action as party defendants. Order, insofar as appealed from, reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion granted. The applicants’ proposed answer to the complaint having already been served, such answer will be deemed to be their pleading in the action as party defendants; and the time to serve a reply to the counterclaim therein set forth or to make any motions addressed to such pleading is extended until 20 days after entry of the .order hereon. The proposed answer of the applicants raises issues of law and fact common to the litigation *between*the present parties; the applicants are ultimately and really interested in the outcome of this litigation; and they have capacity to sue in their own right to enjoin the alleged violation of the Zoning Ordinance *(Marcus*v. *Village of Mamaroneck,*283 N. Y. 325). Under the circumstances, it was an improvident exercise of discretion for the Special Term to deny their motion to intervene (cf. *Harrison*v. *Bain Estates,*2 Mise 2d 52, affd. 2 A D 2d 670; *Central Westchester Humane Soc.*v. *Hilleboe,*202 Mise. 873). Beldoek, P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.