alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### 2052.216-71 Indirect cost rates.

As prescribed at 2016.307-70(b), the contracting officer may insert the following clause in solicitations and contracts where provisional rates without ceiling apply.

# Indirect Cost Rates (JAN 1993)

(a) Pending the establishment of final indirect rates which must be negotiated based on audit of actual costs, the contractor shall be reimbursed for allowable indirect costs as follows:

*

(b) The contracting officer may adjust these rates as appropriate during the term of the contract upon acceptance of any revisions proposed by the contractor. It is the contractor's responsibility to notify the contracting officer in accordance with FAR 52.232-20, Limitation of Cost, or FAR 52.232-22, Limitation of Funds, as applicable, if these changes affect performance of work within the established cost or funding limitations.

*To be incorporated into any resultant contract.

(End of clause)

*Alternate 1.* As prescribed at 2016.307-70(b)(2), the contracting officer may insert the following clause in applicable solicitations and contracts where predetermined rates apply:

# Indirect Cost Rates—Alternate 1 (JAN 1993)

The contractor is reimbursed for allowable indirect costs in accordance with the following predetermined rates:

*

*To be incorporated into any resultant contract.

(End of clause)

*Alternate 2* (OCT 1999). As prescribed at 2016.307-70(b), the contracting officer may insert the following clause in applicable solicitations and contracts where provisional rates with ceilings apply:

# Indirect Costs (Ceiling)—Alternate 2 (OCT 1999)

(a) For this contract, the ceiling amount reimbursable for indirect costs is as follows:

*

(b) In the event that indirect rates developed by the cognizant audit activity on the basis of actual allowable costs result in a lower amount for indirect costs, the lower amount will be paid. The Government may not be obligated to pay any additional amounts for indirect costs above the ceiling rates set forth above for the applicable period.

*To be incorporated into any resultant contract.

(End of clause)
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-50382

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

WALTER LEONARDO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:09-CR-1079-1

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Supreme Court vacated the judgment and remanded the case for

further consideration in light of Tapia v. United States, 564 U.S. ___, 131 S.

Ct. 2382 (2011). The statement of the district judge at sentencing does

support the contention that a longer sentence was given for medical care and

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 6, 2012

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 10-50382 Document: 00511748640 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/06/2012
No. 10-50382

the law is clear now that this was error. We therefore vacate the sentence

and remand for resentencing.

Sentence VACATED; REMANDED for resentencing.

2

Case: 10-50382 Document: 00511748640 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/06/2012
OCR conducted a compliance review of the Idaho Falls School District 91 (IFSD) that addressed whether the district was in compliance with Title IX’s requirement that school districts that sponsor athletic programs must provide equal athletic opportunities for members of both sexes. Among other factors, the regulation requires a recipient to equally effectively accommodate the athletic interests and abilities of students of both sexes. Based on compliance concerns identified, a resolution agreement was obtained.  The district agreed to evaluate its athletic program to determine if girls have unmet interest and ability in current sports offered; sports not offered, but for which there is competition in the district’s normal competitive area; and in developing new sports. Following the evaluation the district is to develop a plan to meet the interests and abilities of girls as well as a procedure to document requests for sports and to ensure that squads are maintained to provide the maximum number of opportunities consistent with interest in the sport. The district is reporting to OCR throughout its self-evaluation, action plan development and implementation.

*Read    the Compliance Review*PDF (200K)    | *Read    the Settlement Agreement*PDF (106K)

Top
# DC 10-8-08
234.005-1 Competition. A contract that is initially awarded from the competitive selection of a proposal resulting from a broad agency announcement (see 235.016) may contain a contract line item or contract option using funds not limited to those identified in 235.016 for the development and demonstration or initial production of technology developed under the contract, or the delivery of initial or additional items if the item or a prototype thereof is created as the result of work performed under the contract, only when it adheres to the following limitations: ( 1 ) The contract line item or contract option shall be limited to the delivery of the minimal amount of initial or additional items or prototypes that will allow for timely competitive solicitation and award of a follow-on development or production contract for those items.
( 2 ) The term of the contract line item or contract option shall be for not more than 2 years.
( 3 ) The dollar value of the work to be performed pursuant to the contract line item or contract option shall not exceed $100 million in fiscal year 2017 constant dollars. (10 U.S.C. 4004)
( 4 ) See PGI 234.005-1 for guidance on providing, upon request, the benefits derived from use of this competitive selection method.
[75 FR 32639, June 8, 2010, as amended at 81 FR 17045, Mar. 25, 2016; 84 FR 4365, Feb. 15, 2019; 87 FR 25145, Apr. 28, 2022; 87 FR 76995, Dec. 16, 2022; 88 FR 80466, Nov. 17, 2023]
22.1018 Notification to contractors and employees. The contracting officer shall take the following steps to ensure that service employees are notified of minimum wages and fringe benefits. ( a ) As soon as possible after contract award, inform the contractor of the labor standards requirements of the contract relating to the Service Contract Labor Standards statute and of the contractor's responsibilities under these requirements, unless it is clear that the contractor is fully informed.
( b ) At the time of award, furnish the contractor Department of Labor Publication WH-1313, Notice to Employees Working on Government Contracts, for posting at a prominent and accessible place at the worksite before contract performance begins. The publication advises employees of the compensation (wages and fringe benefits) required to be paid or furnished under the Service Contract Labor Standards statute and satisfies the notice requirements in paragraph (g) of the clause at 52.222-41, Service Contract Labor Standards.
( c ) Attach any applicable wage determination to Publication WH-1313.
[54 FR 19816, May 8, 1989, as amended at 72 FR 63081, Nov. 7, 2007; 79 FR 24207, Apr. 29, 2014]
16.301-3 Limitations. ( a ) A cost-reimbursement contract may be used only when— ( 1 ) The factors in 16.104 have been considered;
( 2 ) A written acquisition plan has been approved and signed at least one level above the contracting officer;
( 3 ) The contractor's accounting system is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract or order; and
( 4 ) Prior to award of the contract or order, adequate Government resources are available to award and manage a contract other than firm-fixed-priced (see 7.104(e)). This includes appropriate Government surveillance during performance in accordance with 1.602-2, to provide reasonable assurance that efficient methods and effective cost controls are used.
( b ) The use of cost-reimbursement contracts is prohibited for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services (see parts 2 and 12).
[48 FR 42219, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 1742, Jan. 11, 1985; 50 FR 52429, Dec. 23, 1985; 59 FR 64785, Dec. 15, 1994; 60 FR 48248, Sept. 18, 1995; 63 FR 34073, June 22, 1998; 76 FR 14547, Mar. 16, 2011; 77 FR 12927, Mar. 2, 2012; 77 FR 44066, July 26, 2012; 86 FR 61027, Nov. 4, 2021]
EXHIBIT 12



Boeing Capital Corporation and Subsidiaries



Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges



|                                                                                    |  |                          |     |      |   |      |  |      |     |      |   |     |  |   |    
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------ | --- | ---- | - | ---- |  | ---- | --- | ---- | - | --- |  | - | ---
|                                                                                    |  | Years Ended December 31,
|(Dollars in millions)                                                               |  | 2006                     |     | 2005 |   | 2004 |  | 2003 |     | 2002
|Earnings:                                                                           |  |                          |     |      |   |      |  |      |     |      |   |     |  |   |    
|Income from continuing operations before provision for income tax                   |  | $                        | 291 |      | $ | 232  |  | $    | 183 |      | $ | 91  |  | $ | 35 
|Fixed charges                                                                       |  |                          | 353 |      |   | 359  |  |      | 350 |      |   | 358 |  |   | 322
|Income from continuing operations before provision for income tax and fixed charges |  | $                        | 644 |      | $ | 591  |  | $    | 533 |      | $ | 449 |  | $ | 357
|                                                                                   
|Fixed charges:                                                                      |  |                          |     |      |   |      |  |      |     |      |   |     |  |   |    
|Interest expense                                                                    |  | $                        | 353 |      | $ | 359  |  | $    | 350 |      | $ | 358 |  | $ | 319
|Preferred stock dividend requirement(1)                                             |  |                          |    |      |   |     |  |      |    |      |   |    |  |   | 3  
|                                                                                    |  | $                        | 353 |      | $ | 359  |  | $    | 350 |      | $ | 358 |  | $ | 322
|                                                                                   
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                                  |  |                          | 1.8 |      |   | 1.6  |  |      | 1.5 |      |   | 1.3 |  |   | 1.1
|                                                                                   



|(1) |  | Reflects a pre-tax basis.
|--- |  | -------------------------



43
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 Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Rashaun Roberts, Ph.D., Designated Federal Officer, NIOSH, CDC, 1090 Tusculum Avenue, Mailstop C-24, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226, Telephone (513) 533-6800, Toll Free 1(800)CDC-INFO, Email                         *ocas@cdc.gov.*

                        The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign                         **Federal Register**                         notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                    

Kalwant Smagh,

Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2021-01889 Filed 1-27-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
|  |
|--|

Toby Merrill previously founded and directed the Project on Predatory Student Lending at the Legal Services Center of Harvard Law School and taught the predatory lending and consumer protection clinic. The Project represents low-income student loan borrowers in litigation against for-profit colleges and against the policies that enable them. The Project brings cases that enforce the rights of student loan borrowers and works closely with numerous state and federal enforcement agencies. Toby has twice represented legal aid providers and their clients in the Department of Education’s negotiated rulemaking process. She also served on the Massachusetts Division of Professional Licensure’s advisory board on private occupational schools. Toby joined the Legal Services Center’s predatory lending practice as a Skadden Fellow, after a federal clerkship. She graduated from Harvard Law School and Yale College.
EXHIBIT G

Case: 1:12-cv-03395 Document #: 41-11 Filed: 08/17/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:727
OAK HILL

~

CAPI1.H PART"ER'

Oim TEAM

Managing Partners

J Taylor Crandall

Steven B Gruber

Denis J Nayden

Senior Advisor

Mark A Wolfson

Principals

Scott A Baker

HafT L. Eichelberger

Scott B Kauffman

Kevin M Mailender

John P Rachwalski

David S Scott

Michael J. Warren

Associates

Taylor P Catarozoli

Michael J Cromwell

Patrick R Garrison

AdamW Hahn

Jennifer Jun

Jeffrey R Mettam

Anthony J Orazio

Brett H Shapiro

Stephen B. Star

Michael J Stewart

Michael W Vaupen

Bryant P Yung

Rebecca A Zeitels

Legal

John R Monsky

Gardenia P Cucci

Allan i Kahn

Caitln H Melchior

Partners

Ted Dardani

Benjamin Diesbach

Jonathan E Friesel

Stratton R Heath ill

Douglas M Kaden

John R Monsky

Robert L. Morse Jr

William J Pade

Charles B. Patton

Tyler J Wolfram

RECENT INYESTMENT

Oak Hil Capital Partners to

Acquire WaveDivision Holdings in

Partnership with GI Partners and

Wave Management

Learn More

Vice President

Christopher M Williams

Investor Relations

Jeffrey M Mills

Lorie P Coulombe

Capital Markets

Strattoo R Heath ILL

Operations and Finance

Jon Zagrodzky

Shawn G Hessing

Douglas A Vaughn

Case: 1:12-cv-03395 Document #: 41-11 Filed: 08/17/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:728
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ferguson Igbinosun, Appellant.

[833 NYS2d 803]—

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Sheila A. DiTullio, J.), rendered November 14, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of scheme to defraud in the first degree, grand larceny in the third degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree (two counts), forgery in the second degree (four counts), and criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (two counts).

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of, inter alia, scheme to defraud in the first degree (Penal Law § 190.65 [1] [b]), grand larceny in the third degree (§ 155.35), and two counts of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (§ 170.25). Defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel based on, inter alia, defense counsel’s failure to register a timely objection to the testimony of a prosecution witness that defendant’s fingerprint card listed three aliases. Defense counsel’s belated objection to that testimony was not sustained, and defendant has failed to show that a timely objection would have been sustained *(see generally People v Matthews,*27 AD3d 1115, 1116 [2006]). The record establishes that defense counsel pursued a credible trial strategy with respect to the evidence linking defendant to the crimes, based on County Court’s pretrial rulings, and we conclude that defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel *(see generally People v Flores,*84 NY2d 184, 187 [1994]; *People v Baldi,*54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]).

Contrary to defendant’s further contention, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Although defendant may be deported upon completion of his sentence, that fact alone does not warrant a downward modification of his sentence. Also contrary to defendant’s contention, the court’s imposition of consecutive sentences was proper inasmuch as “ ‘the crimes [for which consecutive sentences were imposed were] committed through separate and distinct acts’ ” *(People v Remington,*305 AD2d 1021, 1022 [2003], *lv denied*100 NY2d 598 [2003]; *see*
      *1258
      *People v Salcedo,*92 NY2d 1019, 1021 [1998]; *People v Ramirez,*89 NY2d 444, 451 [1996]).

We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Present—Scudder, P.J., Centra, Lunn, Peradotto and Pine, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 917 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 917

 To amend title 36, United States Code, to designate May 1 as ``Silver 
                       Star Service Banner Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 24, 2017

  Mr. Blunt (for himself and Mrs. McCaskill) introduced the following 
    bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 36, United States Code, to designate May 1 as ``Silver 
                       Star Service Banner Day''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Silver Star Service Banner Day 
Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) Congress has always honored the sacrifices made by the 
        wounded and ill members of the Armed Forces.
            (2) The Silver Star Service Banner has come to represent 
        the members of the Armed Forces and veterans who were wounded 
        or became ill in combat in the wars fought by the United 
        States.
            (3) The Silver Star Families of America was formed to help 
        the people of the United States remember the sacrifices made by 
        the wounded and ill members of the Armed Forces by designing 
        and manufacturing Silver Star Service Banners and Silver Star 
        Flags for that purpose.
            (4) The sole mission of the Silver Star Families of America 
        is to evoke memories of the sacrifices made by members of the 
        Armed Forces and veterans on behalf of the United States 
        through the presence of a Silver Star Service Banner in a 
        window or a Silver Star Flag flying.
            (5) The sacrifices made by members of the Armed Forces and 
        veterans on behalf of the United States should never be 
        forgotten.
            (6) May 1 is an appropriate date to designate as ``Silver 
        Star Service Banner Day''.

SEC. 3. DESIGNATION.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 1 of title 36, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 146. Silver Star Service Banner Day
    ``(a) Designation.--May 1 is Silver Star Service Banner Day.
    ``(b) Proclamation.--The President is requested to issue each year 
a proclamation calling on the people of the United States to observe 
Silver Star Service Banner Day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, 
and activities.''.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for 
chapter 1 of title 36, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
after the item relating to section 145 the following:

``146. Silver Star Service Banner Day.''.
                                 <all>
```
Functional Statements >  Office of the Secretary

## Office of the Secretary (OS)

- OS Functional Statement
- OS Organization Chart    PDF (86KB)
-  OS Delegations of Authority
<PAGE>


                                                                EXHIBIT 10(b)

         [TRANSMITTED ON SUTHERLAND, ASBILL & BRENNAN LLP LETTERHEAD]


                                 April 26, 2000


Board of Directors
Canada Life Insurance Company of New York
Canada Life of New York Variable Annuity Account 2
410 Saw Mill River Road
Ardsley, New York 10502

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We hereby consent to the use of our name under the caption "Legal Matters" in
the Statement of Additional Information contained in Post-Effective Amendment
No. 10 under the Securities Act of 1933 and Post-Effective Amendment No. 12
under the Investment Company Act of 1940 to the Registration Statement on Form
N-4 (File No. 33-64240) filed by Canada Life Insurance Company of New York and
Canada Life of New York Variable Annuity Account 2 with the Securities and
Exchange Commission. In giving this consent, we do not admit that we are in the
category of persons whose consent is required under Section 7 of the Securities
Act of 1933.

                         Very truly yours,

                         SUTHERLAND, ASBILL & BRENNAN LLP


                         By:   /s/  Stephen E. Roth
                             -----------------------------
                                    Stephen E. Roth