alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Date: March 11, 2016

To: Department of Education Negotiators

Cc: Non-department of Education Negotiators

From: Margaret Reiter

Re: Language to include to facilitate non-taxable treatment of successful borrower defense

In the first and second sessions of negotiated rulemaking, the concern was raised that students 

who had been harmed by school misconduct and who successfully defended against repayment 

might have any recovery considered as taxable income. Various negotiators expressed the view 

that this would be unfair because a successful defense should be based on misrepresentations or 

other unlawful, unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or omissions. It was proposed to include 

language that would make clear that a successful borrower defense does not fit the definition for 

a taxable event. 

I said I would provide language which might be useful to make clear that any recovery should be 

non-taxable. The language should apply to successful borrower defenses under both the FFEL 

and the Direct loan programs. I propose the following language could be inserted at the end of 

685.222(g) (based on the Department’s proposed language before the second session of the 

negotiated rulemaking:

685.222(g)(6?) The Secretary considers that any reduction in a borrower’s 

obligation to repay determined under this section has been reduced because of a 

legal infirmity that relates back to the original transaction for enrollment or 

continued enrollment or to the financing of that enrollment or continued 

enrollment.

This proposed language is drawn from the Treasury Department statement regarding borrowers 

who attended Corinthian Colleges: 

For example, a borrower that has a liability reduced because of a legal infirmity 

that relates back to the original sale transaction (for example fraud) may not have 

gross income to the extent of the debt reduction.

Rev. Proc. 2015-57, p. 3, available at https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rp-15-57.pdf

Although a statement from the Secretary may not guarantee recovery will be a non-taxable event, 

including this language should be influential, if not dispositive.
227.7106 Contracts for special works. ( a ) Use the clause at 252.227-7020, Rights in Special Works, in solicitations and contracts where the Government has a specific need to control the distribution of works first produced, created, or generated in the performance of a contract and required to be delivered under that contract, including controlling distribution by obtaining an assignment of copyright, or a specific need to obtain indemnity for liabilities that may arise out of the creation, delivery, use, modification, reproduction, release, performance, display, or disclosure of such works. Use the clause— ( 1 ) In lieu of the clause at 252.227-7013, Rights in Technical Data—Other Than Commercial Products and Commercial Services, when the Government must own or control copyright in all works first produced, created, or generated and required to be delivered under a contract; or
( 2 ) In addition to the clause at 252.227-7013 when the Government must own or control copyright in a portion of a work first produced, created, or generated and required to be delivered under a contract. The specific portion in which the Government must own or control copyright must be identified in a special contract requirement.
( b ) Although the Government obtains an assignment of copyright and unlimited rights in a special work under the clause at 252.227-7020, the contractor retains use and disclosure rights in that work. If the Government needs to restrict a contractor's rights to use or disclose a special work, it must also negotiate a special license which specifically restricts the contractor's use or disclosure rights.
( c ) The clause at 252.227-7020 does not permit a contractor to incorporate into a special work any works copyrighted by others unless the contractor obtains the contracting officer's permission to do so and obtains for the Government a non-exclusive, paid up, world-wide license to make and distribute copies of that work, to prepare derivative works, to perform or display publicly any portion of the work, and to permit others to do so for government purposes. Grant permission only when the Government's requirements cannot be satisfied unless the third party work is included in the deliverable work.
( d ) Examples of works which may be procured under the Rights in Special Works clause include, but are not limited, to audiovisual works, computer data bases, computer software documentation, scripts, soundtracks, musical compositions, and adaptations; histories of departments, agencies, services or units thereof; surveys of Government establishments; instructional works or guidance to Government officers and employees on the discharge of their official duties; reports, books, studies, surveys or similar documents; collections of data containing information pertaining to individuals that, if disclosed, would violate the right of privacy or publicity of the individuals to whom the information relates; or investigative reports.
[60 FR 33471, June 28, 1995, as amended at 88 FR 6586, Jan. 31, 2023]
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6322** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v.
CEDRIC JAMAL GRISSETT , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Florence
. Terry L. Wooten , District Judge. ( 4:06

- cr - 00583

- TLW

- 4 )

Submitted : May 31, 2012 Decided: June 6, 2012

Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Cedric Jamal Grissett, Appellant Pro Se. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina; Carrie Fisher Sherard, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Cedric Jamal Grissett appeals the district court ’ s order denying relief on his motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006)
. We have reviewed the record and find no reversi ble error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Grissett , No. 4:06

- cr - 00583

- TLW

- 4 (D.S.C. Feb. 9, 2012) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-02-1995
<CASH>                                            2621
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     2970
<ALLOWANCES>                                       135
<INVENTORY>                                      11176
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 23548
<PP&E>                                            8144
<DEPRECIATION>                                    6661
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   27757
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            13461
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          1045
<OTHER-SE>                                       12344
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     27757
<SALES>                                           7581
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  7581
<CGS>                                             3987
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     3987
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  4866
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  70
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1342)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        10
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1352)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1352)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.15)
        

</TABLE>
#### 22.804 Affirmative action programs.
Moffett B. Roller

mroller@rollerbauer.com Law Offices



## R OLLER 

## & B

AUER, PLLC Washington Dulles International Airport 45005 Aviation Drive; Suite 200 Dulles, VA 20166 Phone: 202-331-3300 • Fax: 202-331-3322 Lee A. Bauer lbauer@rollerbauer.com November 26, 2013 Mr. Robert Finamore Foreign Carrier Licensing Division Office of International Aviation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 Polling Report: Amended Application of ABC Aerolineas, S.A. de C.V., d/b/a Interjet,

for Renewal and Amendment of Exemption; Docket DOT-OST-2012-0140 Dear Mr. Finamore: We have polled the U.S. carriers on the Service List that was attached to the Amended Application of ABC Aerolineas, S.A. de C.V., d/b/a Interjet, for Renewal and Amendment of Exemption. The original Application that was filed on August 16, 2013, requested renewal of Interjet’s exemption authority to operate on eight U.S.-Mexico city-pairs, and the Amended Application that was filed on November 21, 2013, requested the Department to amend Interjet’s exemption to add authority to operate on the Guadalajara - San Antonio and Mexico City - Laredo city-pairs. None of the U.S. carriers on the Service List has any objection to DOT approval of the Amended Application. Interjet is advised that the Embassy of Mexico has forwarded to the U.S. State Department a diplomatic note designating Interjet on the Guadalajara - San Antonio route. Interjet understands that the Embassy has not yet sent a note designating Interjet on the Mexico City - Laredo route although Interjet understands that this second note will be sent in the near future. Because Interjet is planning to introduce service between Guadalajara and San Antonio imminently—on December 9, 2013—and wants to start marketing immediately, Interjet requests urgent approval of its Amended Application (1) to renew its exemption, (2) to amend its exemption to add authority on the Guadalajara - San Antonio route, and (3) to defer action on the addition of the Mexico City - Laredo route pending receipt of the diplomatic note designating Interjet for the latter route. Prompt approval of the renewal and the amendment will enable Interjet to introduce new service between Guadalajara - San Antonio in time for the holiday travel season and to provide the other public benefits cited in the Amended Application.

## ROLLER 

## & B

AUER, PLLC

Mr. Robert Finamore November 26, 2013 Page 2 We are serving copies of this letter by email on all parties that were served with the Amended Application. Respectfully submitted, ROLLER & BAUER, PLLC Attorneys for ABC Aerolineas, S.A. de C.V., d/b/a Interjet

By: ___________________________ Moffett B. Roller cc: Service List
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from this Form
10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         120,345
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   28,454
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,352)
<INVENTORY>                                      4,613
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               160,425
<PP&E>                                          14,632
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,452)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 190,179
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           35,011
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,764
<OTHER-SE>                                     151,404
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   190,179
<SALES>                                         24,209
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                24,209
<CGS>                                           16,854
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,684
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (1,612)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,136
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,489
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,647
<DISCONTINUED>                                   (960)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,687
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04


</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
§1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Proxim Wireless Corporation (the “Company”) for the year ended
December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned Pankaj S. Manglik, Chief
Executive Officer, and Brian J. Sereda, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer,
of the Company certifies, to the best knowledge and belief of the signatory,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.











/s/
      Pankaj S. Manglik
            
            /s/
      Brian J. SeredaPankaj
      S. Manglik
            
            Brian
      J. SeredaChief
      Executive Officer
            
            Chief
      Financial Officer and TreasurerDate:  March
      28, 2008
            
            Date:  March
      28, 2008
II .t' ~--~ \ 

olocJc.e t shee.~ 

1~_: ··, p-. ; l \.. /" ,r" <" 1\ ,I ·-~··· ~: , '-- '-tJ .. :1 4 '- ~..\o.o.. ,.. .... ... :t .• •.
EXHIBIT 23.2

CONSENT OF RICHTER, USHER & VINEBERG, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-5404) pertaining to the 1983 Non-Statutory Stock Option Plan of ALPNET, Inc. and
subsidiaries, and the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-06091) pertaining to the ALPNET, Inc. 1996 Executive Stock Option Plan, of our Auditors' Report dated January 29, 2001 with
respect to the balance sheets of ALPNET Canada Inc. as at December 31, 2000 and 1999 and the statements of earnings, deficit and cash flows for each of the years ended December 31, 2000,
1999 and 1998, which we have been advised is included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of ALPNET, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2000.

\s\
RICHTER, USHER & VINEBERG

Chartered
Accountants

Montreal,
Quebec
March 16, 2001

41

---
**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**

| Dated:                April 2, 2007                                            |   |   |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/ Li Fu                                                                                |   |   |   |
| Li                FuChief                Executive Officer (principal executive officer) |   |   |        |
|                                                                                          |   |   |        |

|                                                                                                                                                  |   |   |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/ Wenbing Chris Wang                                                                                                                                |   |   |   |
| Wenbing                Chris WangChief                Financial Officer (principal                financial officer and principle accounting officer) |   |   |        |
|                                                                                                                                                  |   |   |        |

----
2401.602-3 Ratification of unauthorized commitments. ( b ) ( 1 ) Requests for ratification of unauthorized commitments shall be submitted in writing through the contracting officer to the ratification approval officials identified in paragraph (b)(3) of this section. The Assistant Secretary or equivalent official for the office that created the unauthorized commitment shall sign the request for ratification.
( 3 ) In accordance with FAR 1.602-3(b)(3), the Senior Procurement Executive may delegate the authority to approve ratifications of individual unauthorized commitments down to, but not below, the level of an Assistant Chief Procurement Officer.
( c ) (5) Concurrence by legal counsel in the Contracting Officer's recommendation for payment of an unauthorized commitment (see FAR 1.602-3(c)(5)) shall not be required when the value of the payment is equal to, or less than, the simplified acquisition threshold.
[71 FR 2434, Jan. 13, 2006, as amended at 77 FR 73525, Dec. 10, 2012]
219.7102 General. The Program includes— ( a ) Mentor firms and protégé firms that meet the criteria in appendix I, section I-102;
( b ) Mentor-protégé agreements that establish a developmental assistance program for a protégé firm;
( c ) A preliminary assessment of the protégé firm's cybersecurity readiness. The DoD Office of Small Business Programs (OSBP), Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Acquisition and Sustainment (OUSD(A&S)), provides this preliminary assessment, which is a benefit of program participation; and
( d ) Incentives that DoD may provide to mentor firms, which include— ( 1 ) Reimbursement for developmental assistance costs through— ( i ) A separately priced contract line item on a DoD contract; or
( ii ) A separate contract, upon written determination by the Director, OSBP, of the cognizant military department or defense agency that unusual circumstances justify reimbursement using a separate contract; or
( 2 ) Credit toward applicable subcontracting goals, established under a subcontracting plan negotiated under FAR subpart 19.7 or under the DoD Comprehensive Subcontracting Test Program, for developmental assistance costs that are not reimbursed.
[65 FR 6555, Feb. 10, 2000; 65 FR 30191, May 10, 2000, as amended at 66 FR 47108, Sept. 11, 2001; 69 FR 74995, Dec. 15, 2004; 70 FR 29645, May 24, 2005; 73 FR 46813, Aug. 12, 2008; 83 FR 12683, Mar. 23, 2018; 87 FR 52349, Aug. 25, 2022]
Before you use the Trimble® UX5 aerial imaging rover, make sure that the payload bay is compatible with the sensor. This instruction card explains how to adapt the payload bay of the UX5 body for a Sony NEX-5 and a Sony a5100 camera. By default, the UX5 body is tooled for the Sony a5100 camera. Notes:

–

These instructions apply only to UX5 bodies that have a serial number greater than S/N UX501218.
– You can order the UX5 Camera Compatibility Kit (P/N UX-G00191-01) from your Trimble distributor.


# Using a Sony a5100 camera Note – Make sure that the Sony NEX-5 adapter pieces and the IR LED trigger cable are removed from the payload bay. Do not use any sharp tools for this. 1. Insert the adapter piece into the camera cavity of the payload bay of the UX5 body. 2. Connect the USB cable to the camera and to the connector from the eBox. Insert the eBox connection vertically into the cavity. 

# Using a Sony NEX-5 camera Note – Make sure that the Sony a5100 adapter piece and the USB trigger cable are removed from the payload bay. Do not use any sharp tools for this. 1. Insert the two adapter pieces into the camera cavity of the payload bay of the UX5 body. 2. Insert the IR LED cable into the cable duct: a. Without using any sharp tools, position the LED vertically in the round opening and gently push the cable into the duct. b. Connect the IR LED cable connector to the connector from the eBox and insert the connection vertically into the cavity. c. Cover the IR LED with the protection cap. The cap should be flush with the surface. warning – Before adapting the payload bay of the UX5 aerial imaging rover, always make sure that the UX5 battery is disconnected from the rover. 

# C Body and Camera Compatibility

Sony a5100 compatible payload bay

IR LED cable, top view IR LED cable, profile view Sony NEX-5 compatible payload bay
22.604-2 Regulatory exemptions. ( a ) Contracts for the following acquisitions are fully exempt from the statute (see 41 CFR 50-201.603): ( 1 ) Public utility services.
( 2 ) Supplies manufactured outside the United States, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
( 3 ) Purchases against the account of a defaulting contractor where the stipulations of the statute were not included in the defaulted contract.
( 4 ) Newspapers, magazines, or periodicals, contracted for with sales agents or publisher representatives, which are to be delivered by the publishers thereof.
( b ) ( 1 ) Upon the request of the agency head, the Secretary of Labor may exempt specific contracts or classes of contracts from the inclusion or application of one or more of the Act's stipulations; *provided,* that the request includes a finding by the agency head stating the reasons why the conduct of Government business will be seriously impaired unless the exemption is granted.
( 2 ) Those requests for exemption that relate solely to safety and health standards shall be transmitted to the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC 202l0. All other requests shall be transmitted to the Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC 202l0.
[48 FR 42258, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 61 FR 67410, Dec. 20, 1996; 68 FR 28082, May 22, 2003; 79 FR 24205, Apr. 29, 2014]
----

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSIONWashington D.C.  20549

**FORM 10-QSB**

Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15 (d)Of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For Quarter Ended:                March 31, 2002

Commission File Number: 0-5662

******CARDIFF COMMUNICATIONS, INC.**(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

	                                    	    NEVADA                                                       87-0267292                          (State or other jurisdiction of                                     (IRS Employer                           incorporation or organization)                                   Identification No.)