alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 22 

Expressing the sense of Congress on the use of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program and the Department of Defense Information 

Technology Exchange Program to obtain personnel with cyber skills 

and abilities for the Department of Defense. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 20, 2017 

Mr. ROUNDS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress on the use of the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program and the Department of Defense Information Technology Exchange 

Program to obtain personnel with cyber skills and abilities for the Department of Defense. 

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 

2 concurring), 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This concurrent resolution may be cited as the 

5 ‘‘Whole of Society Cyber Personnel Cooperation Resolu6 tion of 2017’’. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SCON 22 IS 

1 SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON USE OF INTERGOVERN2 MENTAL PERSONNEL ACT MOBILITY PRO3 GRAM AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE IN4 FORMATION TECHNOLOGY EXCHANGE PRO5 GRAM TO OBTAIN PERSONNEL WITH CYBER 

6 SKILLS AND ABILITIES FOR THE DEPART7 MENT OF DEFENSE. 

8 It is the sense of Congress that— 

9 (1) the Department of Defense should fully use 

10 the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Pro11 gram (IPAMP) and the Department of Defense In12 formation Technology Exchange Program (ITEP) to 

13 obtain cyber personnel across the Government by 

14 leveraging cyber capabilities found at the State and 

15 local government level and in the private sector in 

16 order to meet the needs of the Department for cy17 bersecurity professionals; and 

18 (2) the Department should implement at the 

19 earliest practicable date a strategy that includes 

20 policies and plans to fully use such programs to ob21 tain such personnel for the Department. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 10.1


APUS CAPITAL CORP
Suite 700 - 525 Seymour St
Vancouver B.C
Tel 604-684-6500
Fax 604-684-6501
E MAIL Apus@express.ca

TO: 24 HR AUCTION INC

FROM: APUS CAPITAL CORP
      2009, IRON STREET
      BELLINGHAM, WA
      98225

TERM: The term shall be for ONE year, commencing OCTOBER, 1 1999 and terminating
SEPTEMBER 30, 2000.

GROSS RENT: The tenant shall pay the landlord in advance on the first of each
month payments in the amount of $ 250.00 for the use of the office space and
computers.

ACCEPTANCE: Agreed and accepted for and on behalf of

24 HR AUCTION INC


Per-----------------------

Title---------------------

Date--------------------


APUS CAPITAL CORP

Per----------------------

Title--------------------

Date--------------------
On February 4, 2103, OCR resolved a Title VI compliance review of the Tulsa Public Schools (District).  OCR’s review assessed whether the District discriminates against limited English proficient (LEP) parents and guardians by failing to ensure they have meaningful access to information that is provided to parents and guardians in English.  Prior to the completion of OCR’s investigation,  the District submitted a Resolution Agreement that, when fully implemented, will address the issue assessed in the compliance review.  At the time OCR opened the compliance review,  the District did not have written policies or procedures for responding to parent requests for documents in languages other than English or requests for a foreign language interpreter, and did not consistently track or keep records regarding which parents in the District are LEP and when the District received requests from and provided translation or interpreter services, or  translation/interpreter services to LEP parents.  OCR’s preliminary investigation indicated that the District did not have a set  process in place for notifying LEP parents that it has interpreters and translators available for school-related communications and sometimes had students serve as interpreters for parents.  The investigation also suggested that the District did not consistently  evaluate or assess the language skills of the District and non-District  employees it uses as interpreters and translators and did not provide training to its foreign language interpreters and translators regarding the role of an interpreter/translator, the ethics of interpreting and translating, and the need to maintain confidentiality.  In addition, the investigation noted that the District did not have as many resources in place for communicating with LEP parents who speak a language other than Spanish as it did for Spanish-speaking parents.

Under the Resolution Agreement, the District must submit a detailed plan to OCR for providing language assistance services to LEP parents and guardians ensuring the parents and guardians have meaningful access to information about the District’s programs and activities.  As part of its implementation of this plan, the District will provide language assistance services to all LEP parents and guardians of District students who need such assistance with respect to information about school programs and activities that are provided to other parents and guardians.  The Resolution Agreement also requires the  District to provide training for administrators and staff regarding the provision of language assistance services to LEP parents and guardians, and to ensure that all District employees who serve as interpreters and translators for LEP parents and guardians are appropriately trained and proficient in the languages spoken by the parents/guardians.  OCR will monitor the District’s compliance with the Resolution Agreement.

***Read the Resolution LetterPDF**(161K)**|******Read the Resolution AgreementPDF** (99K)*****

  

Top
#### 204.404 Contract clause.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                                Certification of
           Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer
                   of NT Media Corporation of California, Inc.

      This   certification   is   provided   pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and accompanies the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB (the
"Form 10-KSB") for the year ended December 31, 2004, of NT Media  Corporation of
California, Inc. (the "Issuer").

      I,  Christopher  Briggs,  the Chief  Executive  Officer  and Acting  Chief
Financial Officer of the Issuer, certify that to the best of my knowledge:

      (i)   the Form 10-KSB  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section
            13(a) or Section  15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 (15
            U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

      (ii)  the information contained in the Form 10-KSB fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Issuer.

Dated:  May 20, 2005.
                                       /s/ Christopher Briggs
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Name: Christopher Briggs
Disclaimer

### State Department of Education

Utah State Office of Education250 East 500 SouthP.O. Box 144200Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4200Phone: (801) 538-7500Website: http://www.schools.utah.gov

### State Higher Education Agency

Utah System of Higher EducationBoard of Regents Building60 South 400 WestSalt Lake City, UT 84101-1284Phone: (801) 321-7200Website: http://higheredutah.org/

### Special Education Agency

Special Education ServicesUtah State Office of Education250 East 500 SouthP.O. Box 144200Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4200Phone: (801) 538-7898 Website: https://www.schools.utah.gov/specialeducation

### State Adult Education Agency

Adult Education Services Utah State Board of Education 250 East 500 South P.O. Box 144200 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4200 Phone: (801) 538-7509 Fax: (801) 538-7882 Website: https://www.schools.utah.gov/adulteducation

Back to state map
#### 1852.247-73 Bills of Lading.

As prescribed in 1847.305-70(b), insert a clause substantially as follows:

# Bills of Lading (JUN 2002)

The purpose of this clause is to define when a commercial bill of lading or a government bill of lading is to be used when shipments of deliverable items under this contract are f.o.b. origin.

(a) *Commercial Bills of Lading.* All domestic shipments shall be made via commercial bills of lading (CBLs). The Contractor shall prepay domestic transportation charges. The Government shall reimburse the Contractor for these charges if they are added to the invoice as a separate line item supported by the paid freight receipts. If paid receipts in support of the invoice are not obtainable, a statement as described below must be completed, signed by an authorized company representative, and attached to the invoice.

“I certify that the shipments identified below have been made, transportation charges have been paid by (company name), and paid freight or comparable receipts are not obtainable.

Contract or Order Number: ______________________

Destination: ________________________________”.

(b) *Government Bills of Lading.* (1) International (export) and domestic overseas shipments of items deliverable under this contract shall be made by Government bills of lading (GBLs). As used in this clause, “domestic overseas” means non-continental United States, i.e. Hawaii, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and possessions of the United States.

(2) At least 15 days before shipment, the Contractor shall request in writing GBLs from: ______________________________ [Insert name, title, and mailing address of designated transportation officer or other official delegated responsibility for GBLs]. If time is limited, requests may be by telephone: ________________________ [Insert appropriate telephone number]. Requests for GBLs shall include the following information.

(i) Item identification/ description.

(ii) Origin and destination.

(iii) Individual and total weights.

(iv) Dimensional Weight.

(v) Dimensions and total cubic footage.

(vi) Total number of pieces.

(vii) Total dollar value.

(viii) Other pertinent data.

(End of clause)

[67 FR 38908, June 6, 2002]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,132
<SECURITIES>                                     2,534
<RECEIVABLES>                                   44,794
<ALLOWANCES>                                       930
<INVENTORY>                                     47,553
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               176,460
<PP&E>                                          56,916
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,504
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 258,354
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           66,705
<BONDS>                                         70,253
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,650
<OTHER-SE>                                     119,746
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   258,354
<SALES>                                         64,427
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                64,427
<CGS>                                           43,924
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   43,924
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                15,778
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    47
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,113
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,612
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,312
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,312
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 1

[CONTENTS FILED UNDER SEAL] 

Case: 1:12-cv-01973 Document #: 10-1 Filed: 03/20/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:176
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

___________________________________

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Docket No. 11 CR 0801-1

) Honorable Judge Gary Feinerman

CATALIN STOIAN, and )

MIHAIL STANCU, )

Defendants. )

___________________________________ )

AGREED ORDER TO ENLARGE PROTECTIVE ORDER

GOVERNING DISCOVERY TO INCLUDE 

DEFENDANT STOIAN AND DEFENDANT’S COUNSEL

NOW COMING before this court on Defendant, CATALIN STOIAN’s Agreed Motion 

to Enlarge Protective Order Governing Discovery to include Defendant Stoian and Defendant’s 

Counsel, and all parties in agreement, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. That the Protective Order Governing Discovery, docket number 9 entered on November 

21, 2011, be enlarged to include Defendant Stoian and Defendant’s Counsel to have 

immediate access to all of the materials provided by the United States in preparation for,

and in connection with, any stages of the proceedings in this matter.

2. Furthermore, Defendant Stoain and Defendant’s Counsel agree to be bound by all of the 

terms included in the Protective Order Governing Discovery.

3. Assistant United States Attorney, Angel Krull has no objections to enlarge the protective 

order to include Defendant Stoian and Defendant’s Counsel. 

ENTER: 12-10-2014

Glenn Seiden

SEIDEN NETZKY LAW GROUP _____________________

Attorney for the Defendant Judge

115 S. LaSalle Street-Suite 2600

Chicago, Illinois 60603

Telephone No. 312-236-3060

Email: gseiden@snlgllc.com

1
P R I M E E N E R G Y C O R P O R A T I O N A N D S U B S I D I A R I E S

C O N S O L I D A T E D B A L A N C E S H E E T

( T h o u s a n d s o f d o l l a r s )

A s o f D e c e m b e r 3 1

,

2 0 1 2 2 0 1 1

A S S E T S

C u r r e n t A s s e t s

C a s h a n d c a s h e q u i

v a l e n t s $ 8

, 6 0 2 $ 8

, 6 6 1

R e s t r i c t e d c a s h a n d c a s h e q u i

v a l e n t s 4

, 6 7 2 5

, 1 4 2

A c c o u n t s r e c e i

v a b l e

, n e t 1 3

, 2 1 2 1 6

, 5 0 6

P r e p a i d o b l i g a t i o n s 1

, 6 5 6 7

, 4 6 9

D e r i v a t i v e c o n t r a c t s 1

, 2 2 9 2 2 3

O t h e r c u r r e n t a s s e t s 1

, 0 8 1 1

, 7 2 5

T o t a l C u r r e n t A s s e t s 3 0

, 4 5 2 3 9

, 7 2 6

P r o p e r t y a n d E q u i p m e n t

O i l a n d g a s p r o p e r

t i e s a t c o s t 3 3 8

, 2 0 4 4 9 2

, 3 9 3

L e s s : A c c u m u l a t e d d e p l e t i o n a n d d e p r e c i a t i o n ( 1 5 0

, 2 7 6 ) ( 3 5 5

, 6 4 3 )

1 8 7

, 9 2 8 1 3 6

, 7 5 0

F i e l d a n d o f f i c e e q u i p m e n t a t c o s t 2 3

, 9 7 4 2 1

, 5 5 3

L e s s : A c c u m u l a t e d d e p r e c i a t i o n ( 1 5

, 0 5 2 ) ( 1 3

, 6 0 8 )

8

, 9 2 2 7

, 9 4 5

T o t a l P r o p e r

t y a n d E q u i p m e n t

, N e t 1 9 6

, 8 5 0 1 4 4

, 6 9 5

O t h e r A s s e t s 7 8 4 6 1 4

T o t a l A s s e t s $ 2 2 8

, 0 8 6 $ 1 8 5

, 0 3 5

L I A B I L I T I E S A N D E Q U I T YL I A B I L I T I E S A N D E Q U I T Y

C u r r e n t L i a b i l i t i e s

A c c o u n t s p a y a b l e $ 1 9

, 5 6 8 $ 2 9

, 5 3 8

A c c r u e d l i a b i l i t i e s 7

, 6 1 8 8

, 9 6 3

C u r r e n t p o r t i o n o f a s s e t r e t i

r e m e n t a n d o t h e r l o n g

- t e r

m o b l i g a t i o n s 2

, 1 4 8 1 2

, 8 5 4

D e r i v a t i v e l i a b i l i t y s h o r t

- t e r m 9 9 4 2

, 2 6 9

D u e t o r e l a t e d p a r

t i e s 6 7 6 7

T o t a l C u r r e n t L i a b i l i t i e s 3 0

, 3 9 5 5 3

, 6 9 1

L o n g

- T e r m B a n k D e b t 1 2 2

, 0 0 0 6 9

, 8 0 0

A s s e t R e t i r e m e n t O b l i g a t i o n s 6

, 8 6 4 6

, 4 1 6

D e r i v a t i v e L i a b i l i t y L o n g

- T e r m 4 3 1 1

, 4 6 1

D e f e r r e d I n c o m e T a x e s 2 4

, 1 9 4 1 7

, 9 1 4
PROMISSORY NOTE


                                                                   $1,500,000
                                                      South San Francisco, CA
                                                               April 14, 1995

FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, G. Kirk Raab, promises to pay to the 
order of GENENTECH, INC., ("Genentech"), One Million Five Hundred Thousand 
Dollars ($1,500,000), with interest as described below, at the principal 
offices of Genentech, upon the following terms and conditions:

     1.  Unless extended by Genentech's Board of Directors, the entire 
principal amount of this promissory note  ("Note") shall be due and payable on 
the earlier of (i) April 21, 1996,  (ii) the date of termination of employment 
of the undersigned with Genentech for any reason, or (iii) the date Roche 
Holdings, Inc. or any affiliate thereof causes Genentech to redeem its 
Redeemable Common Stock ("RCS") or any other security issued in exchange for 
such RCS.  The undersigned promises to pay interest from the date hereof on 
the outstanding amount of principal at the rate of 6.69% per annum, compounded 
semi-annually, but not in excess of the maximum interest rate allowed to be 
paid under applicable law.

     2.  If any lawsuit, reference or arbitration is commenced which arises 
out of or relates to this Note, the prevailing party shall be entitled to 
recover from the other party such sums as the court may adjudge to be 
reasonable attorney's fees in the action, reference or arbitration, in 
addition to costs and expenses otherwise allowed by law. 

     3.  The undersigned shall have the right to prepay all or any part of the 
unpaid principal amount of this Note without premium at any time prior to the 
maturity hereof.  The undersigned will use his best efforts to repay the 
unpaid principal amount of this Note and any accrued but unpaid interest 
thereon prior to April 21, 1996.

     4.  Nothing in this Note shall be interpreted to give the undersigned any 
right to continue in the employ of Genentech for any particular period of 
time.

     5.  This Note is not transferable by the undersigned to any other person 
or entity.

     6.  The undersigned expressly waives presentment and demand for payment, 
notice of dishonor, protest and notice of protest of this Note.

     7.  This Note shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in 
accordance with, the laws of the State of California, excluding conflict of 
laws principles that would cause the application of laws of any other 
jurisdiction.


















     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this Note to be signed, 
dated and delivered as of the day and year first above written.

                                                /S/G. KIRK RAAB
                                                _________________

                                                   G. Kirk Raab

GENENTECH, INC. APPROVALS


/S/LARRY SETREN    /S/JOHN P. MCLAUGHLIN   /S/BRAD GOODWIN
_______________    _____________________   _______________________
Human Resources    Management Committee    Controller or Treasurer
#### § 906.25 Approval of Colorado abandoned mine land reclamation plan amendments.

The following is a list of the dates amendments were submitted to OSM, the dates when the Director's decision approving all, or portions of these amendments, were published in the Federal Register and the State citations or a brief description of each amendment. The amendments in this table are listed in order of the date of final publication in the Federal Register.

| Original amendment submission date | Date of final publication | Citation/description |
| --- | --- | --- |
| April 29, 1985 | January 9, 1986 | Reclamation of noncoal sites. |
| October 29, 1996 and June 15, 2005 | September 18, 2006 | Colorado Inactive Mine Reclamation Plan, Chapter VI. |

[62 FR 9937, Mar. 5, 1997, as amended at 71 FR 54585, Sept. 18, 2006]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.0.3

Eastern Division

CP Productions, Inc.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−01505

Honorable Gary Feinerman

Does 1−38

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, June 4, 2012:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable Gary Feinerman:Status hearing 7/10/2012 is

stricken.Mailed notice.(jlj)

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-01505 Document #: 17 Filed: 06/04/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:53
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Louis Heller, Respondent, v. Frahell Realty Corp. et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Appeal by an employer and its insurance carrier from a decision and award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board made on the basis of reduced earnings for continuing partial disability from March 15, 1955 due to a myocardial infarction sustained October 30, 1952, the carrier having paid awards for the period prior to March 15, 1955 and asserting here that there is no substantial evidence of any causally related disability after that date. Appellants seem to attach compelling weight to the fact that claimant’s cardiologist, who testified to continuing disability, did not examine claimant from a time prior to the March 15, 1955 award date until some 26 months after it, and to the fact that hospital records indicated that claimant went through a prostatectomy without cardiac symptoms or medication; but the weight and significance of this evidence was in each case for the board. The evidence supporting the award seems to us substantial. Dr. Bernstein in his 1952 and 1953 reports expressed his opinion that a permanent defect and permanent partial disability existed and on July 20, 1954 testified to permanent partial disability. (Cf. *Matter of Matthews*v. *Inter-Chemical Corp.,*5 A D 2d 914.) Dr. Boas on November 16, 1954 testified to permanent heart damage. Dr. Rothman, who had examined claimant prior to March 15, 1955 examined him again on May 10, 1957 (and examined and prescribed for him on May 23, 1957 after a heart episode intervening those dates). Upon the May 10 examination he found that the condition resulting from the 1952 infarction was permanent, progressive and disabling. He testified on September 19, 1957, that in his opinion claimant was disabled in March, 1955 and continued to be disabled, basing his opinion on “ the normal course of events in these eases * * * the average course of events, plus the observations * * * made on May 8, 1957 and May 23, 1957 ”. Appellants’ experts attributed disability to an underlying sclerotic condition (one of them assigning “ most of the disability ” to that disease and *“*slight disability ” to the heart attack) and both stated that claimant could resume his work in the management of an apartment house, although his duties included making repairs and climbing flights of stairs. Each expert did, however, concede some limitation on his ability to work. Claimant said that he had not worked since 1955. Appellants cite *Matter of Galvin*v. *Bethlehem Steel Co.*(9 A D 2d 564) in support of their position but in that case there was no medical evidence of any continuing disability nor, indeed, any medical or other evidence from which such might be inferred, and the point of the decision was the holding that no legal presumption of continuing disability exists. In this ease no such theory is asserted. Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board.