alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
| (a) | A      certificate(s) issued to MDI by Sellers evidencing the STC Shares to be      purchased by MDI; |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (b) | All      resolutions, certificates and documents MDI may request relating to (i)      the organization, existence, good standing and foreign qualification of      Sellers and STC, (ii) the corporate authority for the execution and      delivery of this Agreement and the other agreements executed and delivered      in connection therewith, (iii) the stock ownership of STC, and (iv) such      other matters relevant to the foregoing as MDI shall reasonably request,      all of which shall be in form and substance satisfactory to      MDI; |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (c) | Such      other documents, instruments and agreements as MDI shall reasonably      request. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (a) | Evidence      that it has instructed its transfer agent, Mellon Investor Services, to      issue to each Seller a certificate evidencing the MDI Shares to be      purchased by such Seller; |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (b) | All      resolutions, certificates and documents Sellers may request relating to      (i) the organization, existence and good standing of MDI, (ii) the      corporate authority for the execution and delivery of this Agreement and      the other agreements executed and delivered in connection therewith, and      (iii) such other matters relevant to the foregoing as Sellers shall      reasonably request, all of which shall be in form and substance      satisfactory to Sellers; and |
|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (c) | Such      other documents, instruments and agreements as Sellers shall reasonably      request. |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
1

Subject: RE: Proposal Regarding Low-Cost, Low-Risk Programs

From: Kevin Jensen

Sent: 12/10/2013 12:30 PM

To: Kolotos, John; 'Chip Cameron (fxcameo@ 'charlie pou (chipbloc@

Cc: 'Heath, Richard C'; 'Mohr, Rhonda (rmohr@ 'Glen Gabert (ggabert@

Subject: Proposal Regarding Low‐Cost, Low‐Risk Programs

Good morning –  

I’ve heard the federal government is shut down today due to weather but I’m nevertheless hoping that you all will see

this email and the attachment today.  Richard Heath and I would like to revisit the proposal we submitted during the last

session.  At that session, the Department indicated that it felt that the potential for unintended consequences for

certain programs had been mitigated through the definition of the minimum size of cohorts and challenge processes

within each of the metrics.   

After conferring with many of our colleagues on the negotiating committee during the last session, we still feel strongly

that the current draft rule does not adequately recognize low‐cost, low borrowing rate programs where the cohort of

students used to measure the program is likely to be unrepresentative of the program in general, therefore

unnecessarily threatening the Title IV eligibility of the program and burdening both schools and the

Department.  Furthermore, we are very concerned that, without appropriate recognition of low‐cost, low‐borrowing

rate programs the current draft rule will incentivize some schools to leave the Direct Loan program or close effective

programs.  The danger of these possibilities includes limiting access to low‐cost programs leaving students with no

options other than higher‐cost programs, or similarly restricting access to affordable federal student loan programs

leaving students with no options other than private student loan markets or higher cost programs that offer federal

student loans.

Please see the attached memo, where we’ve presented additional data and information in support of the need to make

further modification to the draft rule as well as revised proposed language we think will provide institutions with

appropriate, positive incentives to do everything within their authority to keep both costs and borrowing rates for

gainful employment programs low.   

We urge the committee to continue discussion on this topic and look forward to seeing you all this Friday.

Thank you,

Kevin Jensen, M.B.A. 

Financial Aid Director 

College of Western Idaho 

e: kevinjensen@

p: f:
<PAGE>
                                                                    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

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Federal Screw Works (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly
Report"), I, W.T. ZurSchmiede, Jr., Chairman of the Board, Chief Financial
Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of the Company, 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 Quarterly 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
78o(d)); and

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


November 13, 2003

                                   /s/ W.T. ZurSchmiede, Jr.
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   W.T. ZurSchmiede, Jr., Chairman of the Board,
                                   Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of
                                   Federal Screw Works
15.207 Handling proposals and information. ( a ) Upon receipt at the location specified in the solicitation, proposals and information received in response to a request for information (RFI) shall be marked with the date and time of receipt and shall be transmitted to the designated officials.
( b ) Proposals shall be safeguarded from unauthorized disclosure throughout the source selection process. (See 3.104 regarding the disclosure of source selection information (41 U.S.C. chapter 21, Restrictions on Obtaining and Disclosing Certain Information)). Information received in response to an RFI shall be safeguarded adequately from unauthorized disclosure.
( c ) If any portion of a proposal received by the contracting officer electronically or by facsimile is unreadable, the contracting officer immediately shall notify the offeror and permit the offeror to resubmit the unreadable portion of the proposal. The method and time for resubmission shall be prescribed by the contracting officer after consultation with the offeror, and documented in the file. The resubmission shall be considered as if it were received at the date and time of the original unreadable submission for the purpose of determining timeliness under 15.208(a), provided the offeror complies with the time and format requirements for resubmission prescribed by the contracting officer.
[62 FR 51230, Sept. 30, 1997, as amended at 79 FR 24201, Apr. 29, 2014]
#### 219.502 Setting aside acquisitions.
Exhibit
      32(c)







**CERTIFICATION
      FURNISHED 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 on Form 10-Q of Carolina Power & Light
      Company (the “Company”) for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Fred N. Day IV, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
      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), as
      applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




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











/s/
      Fred N. Day IV


Fred
      N.
      Day IV


President
      and Chief Executive Officer


November
      3, 2006








This
      certification is being furnished and shall not be deemed filed by the Company
      for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
      or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Exchange Act
      of
      1934, as amended, or the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
#### 219.705 Responsibilities of the contracting officer under the subcontracting assistance program.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00606-CR

Priscilla Pena

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From the 211th District Court

of Denton County (F-2010-2287-C)

May 1, 2014

Per Curiam

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

the appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed for 

want of jurisdiction.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
#### 1823.271 NASA Solicitation provision and contract clause.

Insert the clause at 1852.223-76, Federal Automotive Statistical Tool Reporting, in solicitations and contracts requiring contractor operation of Government-owned or -leased motor vehicles, including, but not limited to, interagency fleet management system (IFMS) vehicles authorized in accordance with FAR 51.2.

[68 FR 43334, July 22, 2003]
Opinion issued January 7 , 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 1 5 - 00 961 - CV

——————————— CHARLIE WILLIE JONES , JR. , Appellant

V . CHRISTOHPER R. FUNK , Appellee
On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 2

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 10 6484 2 MEMORANDUM OPINION A ppellant, Charlie Willie Jones, Jr., proceeding pro se , timely filed a notice of appeal on November 17, 2015, from the order denying writ of re

- entry, signed by the trial court on November 17, 2015. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 26.1. However, appellant has neither paid the required filing fee nor established indigen ce for purposes of2

appellate costs. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 5, 20.1; see also T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . §§ 51.207, 51.208, 51.941(a), 101.041(1) (West 2013), § 101.0411 (West Supp. 2015); Fees Charged in the Supreme Court, in Civil Cases in the Courts of Appeals, and Before the Judicial Panel on Multi

- District Litigation, Misc. Docket No. 1 5

- 91 58 (Tex. Aug. 28 , 201 5 )
. After being notified by the Clerk of this Court on December 14, 2015, th at this appeal was subject to dismissal for failure to pay th e filing fee, appellant filed a “Request to Dismiss Appeal” on December 16, 2015, because “this is not a final order.” T EX . R. A PP . P
. 5, 42.1(a)(1) , 42.3
. W e construe t his request as a motion to dismiss on the ground that the order appealed from was not a final order. Also, though there is no certificate of conference with the motion , this motion has been on file with the Court for more than 10 days and no party has res ponded to the motion
. See id. 10. 1(a)(5), 10. 3(a)(2). N o other party has filed a notice of appeal and no opinion has issued
. See id. 42.1(a)(1), (c). Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f)
. We dismiss any pending motions as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Keyes , and B la n d
.
#### 1323.705 Electronic products environmental assessment tool.

The procedures for granting exceptions to the requirement in FAR 23.705 are set forth in CAM 1323.70.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          16,800
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,180,841
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  3,019,860
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,505,907
<PP&E>                                       2,203,783
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,228,392)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,701,048
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,088,078
<BONDS>                                        295,091
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,168
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,025,295
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,701,048
<SALES>                                      7,386,020
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,386,020
<CGS>                                        5,420,615
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,420,615
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,556
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             112,937
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                209,874
<INCOME-TAX>                                    65,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            144,874
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   144,874
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 18 (Friday, January 29, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 7559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-01318]



[[Page 7559]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation Nos. 701-TA-657 and 731-TA-1537 (Final)]


Chassis From China; Scheduling of the Final Phase of 
Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty Investigations; Correction

AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Correction of notice.

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

    Correction is made to the March 24, 2021 deadline for filing 
posthearing briefs statements, the April 8, 2021 date of record 
closing, and the April 12, 2021 deadline for filing final comments, in 
the Written Submissions section of the notice which was published on 
January 14, 2021 (86 FR 3193). The correct deadline dates are as 
follows: Filing posthearing briefs and statements is March 23, 2021; 
the record closing is April 7, 2021; and deadline for final comments is 
April 9, 2021.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: January 14, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021-01318 Filed 1-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
### §424. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 424 was editorially reclassified as section 2121 of this title.
* The case is unanimously ordered submitted without oral argument pursuant to

Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### DEC 3 1997 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,

v. MARY FRANCES BENNETT, also known as Freonia Hampton, also known as Mary Deal, Defendant - Appellant. No. 97-6063 (D.C. No. CR-89-132-R) (Western District of Oklahoma)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before BALDOCK , MCKAY and LUCERO , Circuit Judges.

Defendant, Mary Frances Bennett, was charged in an 11 count indictment of various drug and drug-related violations involvi ng cocaine base and phencyclidine, as well as the carrying of a firearm while drug trafficking in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), and 856(a )(2), and 18 U.S.C. §- 2 -

924(c)(1). Following a four-day trial, the jury re turned a verdict of guilty on all counts. We affirmed that conviction. United State s v. Bennett , 930 F.2d 35 (10th Cir. 1991). Several years later, defendant filed a motion pursu ant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure challenging the tr ial court’s jurisdiction in criminal cases. Citing 18 U.S.C. § 3231, under whi ch the district courts of the United States “have original jurisdiction . . . of all offenses against the laws of the United States,” the district court denied the m otion as “obviously frivolous.” See Appellant’s Br., Ex. C. Ms. Bennett was, and remains, adamant that her moti on was filed pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedu re. Rule 60(b), however, has no application whatever to criminal matters. We wo uld typically be inclined to construe Ms. Bennett’s pro se motion liberally, see Riddle v. Mondragon , 83 F.3d 1197, 1202 (10th Cir. 1996), as one filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which provides an appropriate means to raise collateral c hallenges to jurisdiction. But Ms. Bennett’s motion states unequivocally that it i s notto be construed as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, an insistence firmlymaintained on appeal. We must therefore find that the appellant was, and is, aware of 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and has specifically chosen not to invoke its provision s.- 3 -

Because the rules of civil procedure cannot provide Ms. Bennett with the relief she seeks, the order of the district court i s AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith. ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Carlos F. Lucero Circuit Judge
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.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### United States Mint

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

Pursuant to United States Code, Title 31, section 5135(b)(8)(C), the United States Mint announces the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee (CCAC) teleconference public meeting scheduled for January 19, 2021.

*Date:*                     January 19, 2021.                

*Time:*                     10:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m.                

Location: This meeting will occur via teleconference. Interested members of the public may dial in to listen to the meeting at (888) 330-1716; Access Code: 1137147.

*Subject:*                     Review and discussion of obverse and reverse candidate designs for the 2021 “Morgan” and “Peace” silver dollars authorized by Public Law 116-286, the 1921 Silver Dollar Coin Anniversary Act.                

Interested persons should call the CCAC HOTLINE at (202) 354-7502 for the latest update on meeting time and access information.

The CCAC advises the Secretary of the Treasury on any theme or design proposals relating to circulating coinage, bullion coinage, Congressional Gold Medals, and national and other medals; advises the Secretary of the Treasury with regard to the events, persons, or places to be commemorated by the issuance of commemorative coins in each of the five calendar years succeeding the year in which a commemorative coin designation is made; and makes recommendations with respect to the mintage level for any commemorative coin recommended.

                    For members of the public interested in listening in to the provided call number, this is a reminder that the public attendance is for listening purposes only. Any member of the public interested in submitting matters for the CCAC's consideration is invited to submit them by email to                     *info@ccac.gov.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennifer Warren, United States Mint Liaison to the CCAC; 801 9th Street, NW; Washington, DC 20220; or call 202-354-7208.

(Authority: 31 U.S.C. 5135(b)(8)(C))

Eric Anderson,

Executive Secretary, United States Mint.

[FR Doc. 2021-00730 Filed 1-13-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Horace Ford, Appellant, v. Edward M. Fay, as Warden of Green Haven Prison, Respondent.

In a habeas corpus proceeding, relator appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, entered May 7, 1963 after a hearing, which dismissed the writ and remanded him to the custody of respondent. Appeal dismissed. The inquiry into relator’s detention has become moot in view of the fact that on July 26, 1963 he was released from imprisonment and placed on parole, and that on September 17,1963 the term of his maximum sentence expired. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.