alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### 252.225-7004 Report of Intended Performance Outside the United States and Canada—Submission after Award.

As prescribed in 225.7204(b), use the following clause:

# Report of Intended Performance Outside the United States and Canada—Submission After Award (Jul 2024)

(a) *Definition.* As used in this clause—

*United States* means the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and outlying areas.

(b) *Reporting requirement.* The Contractor shall submit a report in accordance with this clause, if the Contractor or a first-tier subcontractor will perform any part of this contract outside the United States and Canada that—

(1) Exceeds the threshold specified in Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 225.7201(a) on the date of award of this contract; and

(2) Could be performed inside the United States or Canada.

(c) *Submission of reports.* The Contractor—

(1) Shall submit a report as soon as practical after the information is known;

(2) To the maximum extent practicable, shall submit a report regarding a first-tier subcontractor at least 30 days before award of the subcontract;

(3) Need not resubmit information submitted with its offer, unless the information changes;

(4) Shall submit all reports to the Contracting Officer; and

(5) Shall submit a copy of each report to: Principal Director, Defense Pricing, Contracting, and Acquisition Policy (Contract Policy), OUSD(A&S) DPCAP/CP, Washington, DC 20301-3060.

(d) *Report format.* The Contractor—

(1) Shall submit reports using—

(i) DD Form 2139, Report of Contract Performance Outside the United States; or

(ii) A computer-generated report that contains all information required by DD Form 2139; and

(2) May obtain copies of DD Form 2139 from the Contracting Officer or via the Internet at *https://www.esd.whs.mil/Directives/forms/. *

(End of clause)

[70 FR 20839, Apr. 22, 2005, as amended at 70 FR 35546, June 21, 2005; 71 FR 75893, Dec. 19, 2006; 72 FR 30278, May 31, 2007; 75 FR 45074, Aug. 2, 2010; 78 FR 73450, Dec. 6, 2013; 80 FR 36905, June 26, 2015; 84 FR 25188, May 31, 2019; 85 FR 61504, Sept. 29, 2020; 89 FR 60832, July 29, 2024]

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

At 79 FR 11342, Feb. 28, 2014, § 252.225-7004 was amended by revising the clause date and amending paragraph (a); however, the amendments could not be incorporated as indicated.
Honorable John Boehner
          Chairman
          Committee on Education and the Workforce
          House of Representatives
          Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Some time ago, you wrote to the Secretary about an interpretation of            the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) as it applies            to Titles I and II of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) and the Carl            D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act (Perkins Act). I want            to let you know of recent developments concerning that interpretation            and provide you with a copy of new guidance the Department has issued            at my direction. I am sending an identical response to Congressmen Hoekstra            and McKeon.

The Department of Education issued guidance on January 18, 2001, regarding            the applicability of FERPA to disclosures of student information to            meet the performance accountability requirements of the Adult Education            and Family Literacy Act (Title II of WIA) and the Perkins Act. On January            19, 2001, the Department of Labor, in conjunction with the Department            of Education, issued guidance on meeting the performance information            required by section 122 of WIA.

After I was informed of the nature of the guidance, I requested a comprehensive            review of the facts surrounding the issuance. After a thorough review            of this issue, the Department has rescinded the 2001 documents and has            issued new guidance, a copy of which is enclosed.

I am most appreciative of your interest in the privacy rights of parents            and students. Please be assured that the Department of Education will            make every effort to ensure that these rights are protected.

I look forward to continuing to work with you and the Committee on            Education and the Workforce.

| | Sincerely,
              /s/
              William D. Hansen
| | ------------------------------------------------------------

|Last Modified: 09/15/2004
|-------------------------
227.303 Contract clauses. ( 1 ) Use the clause at 252.227-7039, Patents—Reporting of Subject Inventions, in solicitations and contracts containing the clause at FAR 52.227-11, Patent Rights—Ownership by the Contractor.
( 2 ) ( i ) Use the clause at 252.227-7038, Patent Rights—Ownership by the Contractor (Large Business), instead of the clause at FAR 52.227-11, in solicitations and contracts for experimental, developmental, or research work if— ( A ) The contractor is other than a small business concern or nonprofit organization; and
( B ) No alternative patent rights clause is used in accordance with FAR 27.303(c) or (e).
( ii ) Use the clause with its Alternate I if— ( A ) The acquisition of patent rights for the benefit of a foreign government is required under a treaty or executive agreement;
( B ) The agency head determines at the time of award that it would be in the national interest to acquire the right to sublicense foreign governments or international organizations pursuant to any existing or future treaty or agreement; or
( C ) Other rights are necessary to effect a treaty or agreement, in which case Alternate I may be appropriately modified.
( iii ) Use the clause with its Alternate II in long-term contracts if necessary to effect treaty or agreements to be entered into.
[72 FR 69159, Dec. 7, 2007]
Exhibit 23





Certified Public
Accountants | 280 Kenneth Drive, Suite 100 | Rochester, New York 14623 | 585.427.8900 | EFPRotenberg.com









CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM



SORL Auto Parts, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Delaware



We hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference in the Registration Statementon Form S-3 of SORL Auto Parts, Inc. and Subsidiaries of our report dated March 29, 2012
relating to the consolidated financial statements, which appear in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.







EFP Rotenberg, LLP

Rochester,
New York

March 29, 2012
On September 10, 2020, the Department announced a streamlined waiver for  State Lead Agencies that are also State Educational Agencies (SEAs) a waiver  for the period of availability for the use of IDEA Part C funds. This waiver is  authorized under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), Pub. L. No. 116-136 (March 27, 2020), the Secretary of Education is  authorized to consider waivers to extend the period of availability for certain  Federal funds. The CARES Act does not authorize the Secretary to consider  waivers from State Lead Agencies that are not SEAs.

----

Part C Waiver Authority

      -  ***Waiver Authority for the Period of Availability for Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part C Funds for Federal fiscal year (FFY) 2018***PDF (297KB) 
      ***Request Form for Part C Waiver***PDF (3.6MB) 

----

Part C POA Fiscal Waivers

Guam | Iowa | Minnesota | Nebraska | Northern Mariana Islands | Oregon | States and TerritoriesGuam-  Guam Part C POA Waiver for 2020 (08/01/2020)PDF (118KB)
Iowa-  Iowa Part C POA Waiver for 2020 (09/29/2020)PDF (142KB)
Minnesota-  Minnesota Part C POA Waiver for 2020 (09/28/2020)PDF (118KB)
Nebraska-  Nebraska Part C POA Waiver for 2020 (10/01/2020)PDF (118KB)
Northern Mariana Islands-  Northern Mariana Islands Part C POA Waiver for 2020 (09/28/2020)PDF (119KB)
Oregon-  Oregon Part C POA Waiver for 2020 (09/28/2020)PDF (391KB)
  Last Modified: 12/10/2020
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT DAMIAN A. PARKER, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D20-954 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Opinion filed September 16, 2020. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Keith Spoto, Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Johnson v. State, 60 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. 2011); Lindquist v. State, 155 So. 3d 1193 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014); Durant v. State, 177 So. 3d 995 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (en banc); Walden v. State, 112 So. 3d 578 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013); Haynes v. State, 106 So. 3d 481 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013).

CASANUEVA, LUCAS, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Butler
Manufacturing Company Consolidated Statements of Operations for the quarter
ended June 30, 2000, and Consolidated Balance Sheet as of June 30, 2000, and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000015840
<NAME> BUTLER MANUFACTURING COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          17,519
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  137,197
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     57,793
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               263,860
<PP&E>                                         253,309
<DEPRECIATION>                                 150,841
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 407,172
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          180,465
<BONDS>                                         56,830<F1>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        12,623
<OTHER-SE>                                     205,980<F2>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   407,172
<SALES>                                        463,225
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               462,854<F3>
<CGS>                                          386,354
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  386,354
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                59,979<F4>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,672
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,290
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,432
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,858
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,858
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.32
<FN>
<F1>Reflects long-term debt, less current maturities
<F2>Reflects other stockholders' equity before deduction of $62.2 million cost
of treasury stock
<F3>Reflects net sales plus net international joint venture income less net other
expense
<F4>Consists of selling, general and administrative expense
</FN>


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 99.2
                            Section 906 Certification

         I, Dennis M.  McGrath,  Chief  Financial  Officer of  PhotoMedex,
Inc., a Delaware  corporation  (the  "Company"),  do hereby certify, in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

              (1) this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to our Annual Report on
              Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the
              "Amendment") 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 Amendment fairly presents, in
              all material respects, the financial condition and results of
              operations of the Company.

                                                  PHOTOMEDEX, INC.


Dated: April 30, 2003                             By: /s/ Dennis M. McGrath
                                                  -------------------------
                                                  Dennis M. McGrath
                                                  Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of DNB Financial Corporation (the "Registrant") on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Gerald F. Sopp, Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



/s/ GERALD F. SOPP Gerald F. Sopp Chief Financial OfficerMarch 22, 2011


---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 31(b)  CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  I, S. Colin Neill, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Pharmos Corporation;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  (a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.  /s/ S. COLIN NEILL ------------------------- S. Colin Neill Chief Financial Officer Date: March 15, 2007
EXHIBIT 10(z)

SEALRIGHT CO., INC.
9201 Packaging Drive
DeSoto, Kansas 66018



Steve Saucier

Dear Steve:

          The Board of Directors of Sealright has approved
supplementary benefits for key executives.  The Benefits include
a Retention Payment and Severance Enhancements, but do not
otherwise modify your existing agreements or benefits.

Retention Payment

          If you remain in the continuous employment of Sealright
and perform your present duties through May 29, 1998, you will
receive a one time payment of $60,000.  However, if you are asked
to leave before this date without cause, you will receive this
payment.

Severance Enhancements

          If your employment with Sealright or its successor is
terminated without cause you will receive the benefits under the
Severance Pay Plan or your individual agreement plus the
following:

          1.   Payment of COBRA costs for as long as you desire  
               such insurance coverage up to 12 months.
          2.   Payment for outplacement services for as long as
               the services are needed up to 12 months.
          3.   Payment of your base salary for 12 months
               following the effective date of the termination in
               place of your existing arrangement.

In the event no transaction involving Sealright has been
consummated by December 31, 1998, the Board will review the
Severance Enhancements as well as all other benefits in the
normal course.

          If you have any questions about the foregoing, please
contact Carl Walker or me.


                                   Sincerely,


                                   /s/ Charles F. Marcy
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Benton, Coleman and Willis 

DOG FACE MANAGEMENT, INC. T/A 

 TONY ELLIOTT BAND 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 0459-98-1 PER CURIAM 

 JUNE 16, 1998 

WILLIAM J. USHER 

 FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION 

 (Karen M. Rye, on brief), for appellant. 

 (C. Allen Riggins; Parker, Pollard & Brown, 

on brief), for appellee. 

 Dog Face Management, Inc. t/a Tony Elliott Band ("employer") 

contends that the Workers' Compensation Commission erred in 

finding that William J. Usher ("claimant") was not bound by his 

response to a Request for Admission propounded to him by 

employer. Upon reviewing the record and the briefs of the 

parties, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. 

Accordingly, we summarily affirm the commission's decision. See

Rule 5A:27. 

 Employer propounded requests for admission to claimant. 

Employer's request for admission number 14 asked claimant to 

admit that he "is not disabled from performing the functions of a 

guitar player." Claimant responded, "denied as to the period 

6/10/95 through 6/30/95." Claimant later responded to employer's 

interrogatories by stating that he intended to claim temporary 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
 -2- 

total disability benefits from June 10, 1995 through August 9, 

1995. In denying employer's request to limit claimant's period 

of disability by binding him to his response to request for 

admission number 14, the commission found as follows: 

 We find that the Deputy Commissioner 

acted properly in denying Dog Face's request 

to limit the period of disability from the 

date of the accident through June 30, 1995. 

Although the claimant responded to the 

request for admission that he was disabled 

from June 10, 1995, through June 30, 1995, he 

also responded to interrogatories in which he 

said the benefits that he claimed were 

"temporary total benefits from June 10, 1995 

to August 9, 1995." 

 Thus, the claimant filed two documents, 

one in which he limited his claim to June 30, 

1995, and the other in which he limited his 

claim to August 9[,] 1995. Dog Face has not 

identified any way in which its defense of 

the claim was prejudiced by the inconsistent 

responses. We see no reason why we should 

consider one document and not the other. 

 Rule 2.2 of the Rules of the Virginia Workers' Compensation 

Commission provides that "[e]xcept for rules which the Commission 

promulgates, it is not bound by statutory or common law rules of 

pleading or evidence or technical rules of practice." In light 

of Rule 2.2 and claimant's conflicting responses to employer's 

discovery requests, we cannot say as a matter of law that the 

commission erred in refusing to limit the period of disability. 

 For these reasons, we affirm the commission's decision. 

Affirmed.
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 255 

Congratulating the National Federation of Federal Employees on the celebration of the 100th anniversary of its founding and recognizing the vital 

contributions of its members to the United States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2017 

Ms. HEITKAMP submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Congratulating the National Federation of Federal Employees on the celebration of the 100th anniversary of its 

founding and recognizing the vital contributions of its 

members to the United States. 

Whereas the National Federation of Federal Employees (referred to in this preamble as the ‘‘NFFE’’) was created 

in 1917 as the first union in the United States to exclusively represent civil service Federal employees; 

Whereas the NFFE preserves, promotes, and improves the 

rights and working conditions of Federal employees and 

other professionals through all lawful means, including 

collective bargaining, legislative activities, and contributing to civic and charitable organizations; 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 255 IS 

Whereas the contributions of the NFFE are noted in history 

through a century of achievements for the Federal labor 

movement, including numerous reforms to workforce policy and working conditions; 

Whereas NFFE members serve the United States by performing critical functions throughout Federal agencies, 

including the Department of Defense, the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development, the Department of 

Veterans Affairs, the Bureau of Land Management, the 

Forest Service, the National Park Service, the Federal 

Aviation Administration, the General Services Administration, the Indian Health Service, the Passport Service 

of the Bureau of Consular Affairs, and the Corps of Engineers; 

Whereas, through a partnership with the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers and the 

American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, the NFFE promotes better working 

conditions and an improved quality of life for working 

families across the United States; 

Whereas the NFFE represents more than 100,000 Federal 

employees; and 

Whereas the NFFE continues to ensure that the voices of 

Federal civil servants are properly represented: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate congratulates and honors 

2 the National Federation of Federal Employees on the cele3 bration of the 100th anniversary of its founding. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS