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

Exhibit 1: Excerpts of Deposition of Jacob DeJongh 

 Pgs. 1-5 

 Pgs. 79-80 

 Pgs. 117-118 

 Pgs. 144-149 

 Pgs. 171-179 

 Pgs. 258-259 

 Pgs. 272-273 

 Pgs. 342-343 

 Pgs. 371 

Exhibit 2: CCL001675 

Exhibit 3: Excerpts of CCL Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of Daniel Lambert 

 Pgs. 1-5

 Pg. 16

 Pgs. 64-65

 Pgs. 106-107

 Pgs. 137-140

 Pgs. 144-151

 Pgs. 172-176

 Pgs. 189-90

 CCL Lambert Deposition Exhibit 19, Email Chain

 CCL Lambert Deposition Exhibit 24, Email Chain

Exhibit 4: Excerpts of Berkley Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of Rebecca Foster 

 Pgs. 1-4

 Pgs. 14-20

 Pgs. 24-25

 Pgs. 49-50

 Pgs. 84-86

 Berkley Deposition Exhibit 12, Response to FTC Civil Investigation Demand

Exhibit 5: Marketing Agreement Between VOMT and CCL 

Exhibit 6: Marketing Agreement Between VOMT and Berkley 

Exhibit 7: Excerpts from VOMT Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of Daniel Lambert 

 Pgs. 1-3 

 Pgs. 7-11

 Pg. 21

Exhibit 8: Supplier Agreement Between ESG and CCL 

Exhibit 9: Supplier Agreement Between EFA and CCL 

Case: 1:12-cv-04069 Document #: 146-1 Filed: 10/10/13 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:1272
2

Exhibit 10: Excerpts of Scott Broomfield FTC Deposition 

 Pgs. 1-4 

 Pgs. 71-73

Exhibit 11: Excerpts of Jacob DeJongh FTC Deposition 

 Pgs. 1-3

 Pgs. 28-29

 Pg. 79

Exhibit 12: Excerpts of Deposition of CCL’s Director of Marketing Jennifer Poole 

 Pgs. 1-3 

 Pg. 67

 Poole Deposition Exhibit 3

Exhibit 13: Excerpts of Grant Birchmeier’s Response to VOMT’s Interrogatories 

Exhibit 14: Excerpts of Stephen Parkes’ Response to VOMT’s Interrogatories 

Exhibit 15: Excerpts of Regina Stone’s Response to CCL’s Interrogatories 

Exhibit 16: Sample of Online Consumer Complaints 

Exhibit 17: Letter from Kentucky Office of Attorney General to Berkley Re: Consumer 

Complaints 

Exhibit 18: CCL001754 

Exhibit 19: Banks v. Caribbean Cruise Line, et al., Case No. 1:12-cv-00584-JG-VMS, Dkt. 49, 

Report and Recommendation 

Exhibit 20: Banks Docket Sheet 

Exhibit 21: Excerpts of Deposition of Stephen Parkes 

 Pgs. 1-4 

 Pgs. 76-78

Exhibit 22: Excerpts of Deposition of Regina Stone 

 Pgs. 1-4

 Pg. 94-96

Exhibit 23: Excerpts of Deposition of Grant Birchmeier 

 Pgs. 1-3

 Pg. 36

Exhibit 24: CCL002618 

Exhibit 25: Declaration of Scott Rauscher 

 Exhibit 25-A: Loevy & Loevy Firm Resume 

Exhibit 26: Declaration of Jay Edelson 

 Exhibit 26-A: Edelson LLC Firm Resume 

Case: 1:12-cv-04069 Document #: 146-1 Filed: 10/10/13 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:1273
#### 225.7018-0 Scope.

This section implements 10 U.S.C. 4872.

[89 FR 46820, May 30, 2024]
241.202 Procedures. ( 1 ) *Connection and service charges.* The Government may pay a connection charge when required to cover the cost of the necessary connecting facilities. A connection charge based on the estimated labor cost of installing and removing the facility shall not include salvage cost. A lump-sum connection charge shall be no more than the agreed cost of the connecting facilities less net salvage. The order of precedence for contractual treatment of connection and service charges is— ( i ) No connection charge.
( ii ) Termination liability. Use when an obligation is necessary to secure the required services. The obligation must be not more than the agreed connection charge, less any net salvage material costs. Use of a termination liability instead of a connection charge requires the approval of the service power procurement officer or designee.
( iii ) Connection charge, refundable. Use a refundable connection charge when the supplier refuses to provide the facilities based on lack of capital or published rules which prohibit providing up-front funding. The contract should provide for refund of the connection charge within five years unless a longer period or omission of the refund requirement is authorized by the service power procurement officer or designee.
( iv ) Connection and service charges, nonrefundable. The Government may pay certain nonrefundable, nonrecurring charges including service initiation charges, a contribution in aid of construction, membership fees, and charges required by the supplier's rules and regulations to be paid by the customer. If possible, consider sharing with other than Government users the use of (and costs for) facilities when large nonrefundable charges are required.
( 2 ) *Construction and labor requirements.* Follow the procedures at PGI 241.202(2) for construction and labor requirements associated with connection and service charges.
[71 FR 3417, Jan. 23, 2006]
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 210 

To correct the engrossment of S. 722. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 29, 2017 

Mr. CORKER submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

To correct the engrossment of S. 722. 

1 Resolved, That in the engrossment of S. 722, an Act 

2 to provide congressional review and to counter Iranian and 

3 Russian governments’ aggression, the Secretary of the 

4 Senate shall— 

5 (1) in section 216(c)— 

6 (A) strike paragraph (4) and insert the fol7 lowing: 

8 ‘‘(4) FLOOR CONSIDERATION IN HOUSE OF

9 REPRESENTATIVES.—If a committee of the House of 

10 Representatives to which a joint resolution of ap11 proval or joint resolution of disapproval has been re12 ferred has not reported the joint resolution within 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 210 ATS 

1 10 calendar days after the date of referral, that 

2 committee shall be discharged from further consider3 ation of the joint resolution.’’; 

4 (B) in paragraph (5)(A)— 

5 (i) in clause (i), strike ‘‘section 216 

6 A3 that is described as’’ and insert ‘‘sub7 section (a)(3)(A) that relates to’’; and 

8 (ii) in clause (ii), strike ‘‘section 216 

9 A3 that is described as’’ and insert ‘‘sub10 section (a)(3)(B) that relates to’’; and 

11 (C) in paragraph (7)(A), strike ‘‘but appli12 cable’’ and all that follows through ‘‘dis13 approval,’’; and 

14 (2) in section 236, strike subsection (b) and in15 sert the following: 

16 ‘‘(b) EXCEPTION RELATING TO IMPORTATION OF

17 GOODS.—No provision affecting sanctions or licensing ac18 tions under this title or an amendment made by this title 

19 shall apply to any portion of a sanction or licensing action 

20 that affects the importation of goods.’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Human intelligence: all humans,all minds, all the time**
 
PDF | Mobi | ePub
 
SuDoc Number:D 101.146/14:H 88
Item Number:0307-A-53 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000689628
 
January 10, 2020
|
|

Judith A. Winston was sworn in as General Counsel to the U.S. Department of Education in June 1993. She manages a staff of over 100, including more than 80 attorneys. The Office of General Counsel interprets laws affecting Department operations, drafts and reviews regulations and legislation, represents the Department in litigation, and advises the Secretary on policy issues. The Office also manages the Department's ethics and regulations programs.

In 1997, President Clinton asked Winston to head the President's Initiative on Race, where she served as Executive Director until September 1998. The Race Initiative engaged many diverse groups, communities, regions and various industries in a search for understanding the causes of racial tension in our country. Through thoughtful study, constructive dialogue, and positive action, the Race Initiative addressed the continuing challenge of how Americans can live and work together more productively.

Winston resumed her leadership as General Counsel to the Department of Education in January 1999.

In March 2000, the President named Winston the Acting Under Secretary for the Department of Education.  As Acting Under Secretary, Winston works with the Secretary and Deputy Secretary on management policy and operations, and represents the Department on the President's Management Council.  As a principal advisor to the Secretary, Winston also works with the Secretary and Deputy Secretary on strategic initiatives that help define a broad, coherent vision for achieving the National Education goals and the Secretary's priorities.

Previously, Winston served as an Associate Professor of Law at American University in Washington, D.C. where she taught civil procedure and civil rights courses. She also worked as a lawyer on a variety of civil rights, race, and gender equity issues.

Formerly, she was the Deputy Director for Public Policy at the Women's Legal Defense Fund in Washington, Deputy Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and Assistant General Counsel for Educational Equity at the U.S. Department of Education. She was Executive Assistant and Legal Counsel to the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission and Special Assistant to the Director of the Office for Civil Rights in the former U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.

Winston has received a number of honors and citations, including the prestigious Thurgood Marshall Award, recognizing her lifetime commitment to the cause of civil rights. She has served on numerous boards and committees and has authored many articles on civil rights, employment discrimination, and women of color in the workplace.

Winston is a graduate of the Georgetown University Law Center and Howard University. She was born in Atlantic City, New Jersey and attended public schools there and in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

She is married to Michael R. Winston, an historian, President of the Alfred Harcourt Foundation, and former Vice President for Academic Affairs at Howard University. They have two daughters.

|Last Modified: 03/02/2011
|-------------------------
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 We hereby
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form
S-3 (Nos. 333-116478, 333-116478-01, 333-116478-02, 333-85716, 333-85716-01,
333-85716-02, 333-106200, 333-106200-01, 333-132574, 333-132574-01,
333-132574-02, and 333-132574-03), the Registration Statements on Form S-3D
(Nos. 333-128543 and 333-102845), and the Registration Statements on Form S-8
(Nos. 333-02003, 333-112453, 333-110372, 333-95967 and 333-144047) of PPL
Corporation of our report dated February 24, 2006, except for Note 10, "Sale of
Interest in Griffith Plant" section, which is as of December 13, 2006, Note 10,
"Sale of Latin American Businesses" section, which is as of June 20, 2007 and
Note 10 "Anticipated Sale of Gas and Propane Businesses" section, which is as of
February 28, 2008, relating to the consolidated financial statements and
financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.
 
 
 
 
 /s/
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
 Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania
 February
28, 2008
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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

Eastern Division

Richard Wade Architects, P.C.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−03382

Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber

Pride & Joy Manufacturing Company, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, August 22, 2012:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber:The Court's minute entry

[21] dated 8/22/2012 is corrected to read as follows: Plaintiff's individual claims against

defendant Pride & Joy Manufacturing Company are dismissed with prejudice and without

costs. Plaintiff's class claims against defendant Pride & Joy Manufacturing Company are

dismissed without prejudice and without costs. Plaintiff's individual claims against John

Does 1−10 are dismissed with prejudice and without costs, pursuant to Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 41. Status hearing stricken.Mailed notice(wp, )

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-03382 Document #: 22 Filed: 08/22/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:76
1

Subject: FW: FYI : Proposal 

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ 

From: Heath, Richard C [mailto:rcheath@   

Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 6:25 PM

To: Chip Cameron

Cc: Kevin Jensen; Rhonda Mohr; Kolotos, John; Glen Gabert

Subject: FYI : Proposal  

Here is the proposal I was referring to earlier today. Please distribute as appropriate.

Rich Heath

Sent from my iPad

Proposal:  That GE programs in which fewer than fifty percent of program completers have used Title IV loans

automatically be exempted from any further eligibility determinations under GE.

Rationale:  The central objective of the gainful employment metrics is to ensure that students do not incur loan

obligations they cannot repay after completing their programs.   Programs in which fewer than fifty percent of the

completers do not borrow will by definition have a median federal loan debt of zero.  This policy is consistent with the

GE final regulation of June 2011.   It was based on the sound policy that federal policies should encourage institutions to

keep borrowing to a minimum.

This policy could be implemented by ED cross referencing the IPEDS completion data (perhaps further sorted by

institutions to ensure that discrete GE programs are considered) for GE programs with OSFA student aid data collected

in NSLDS.

From June 2011 regulation, comment review reflects the following:

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/06/13/2011‐13905/program‐integrity‐gainful‐employment‐debt‐

measures

Finally, we are revising the regulations to provide that programs with a median loan debt of zero are meeting the

measures. This clarification is a logical extension of the debt measures since programs with a median loan debt of zero

are not placing any debt burden on the majority of their students.

The information contained in this email may be confidential and/or legally privileged. It has been sent for the sole use of

the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any

unauthorized review, use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its

content, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply email

and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you.
2
#### 236.274 Restriction on acquisition of steel for use in military construction projects.

In accordance with section 108 of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, 2009 ( Pub. L. 110-329, Division E) and the same provision in subsequent military construction appropriations acts), do not acquire, or allow a contractor to acquire, steel for any construction project or activity for which American steel producers, fabricators, or manufacturers have been denied the opportunity to compete for such acquisition of steel.

[74 FR 2418, Jan. 15, 2009, as amended at 80 FR 15911, Mar. 26, 2015]
M. P. No. 74-290.

#### Florence T. Concannon *v.*Richard Concannon *et al.*

*Kirshenbaum & Kirshenbaum, Alfred Factor,*for petitioner. *Adolph N. Anderson, Jr.,*for respondent, Industrial National Bank of Rhode Island, Trustee.

Petition of respondent, Industrial National Bank of Rhode Island, for a writ of certiorari is granted.
<PAGE>

                               FIRST AMENDMENT TO
                                REPRICING WARRANT

     This Amendment is to that certain Repricing Warrant issued by Telecom
Wireless Corporation, a Utah corporation (the "Company"), to the undersigned
(the "Holder") on or about ________________, 1999.

     For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

     1. Notwithstanding anything in the Repricing Warrant to the contrary, the
number of Repricing Shares issuable upon exercise of the Repricing Warrant shall
be equal to the number of Purchased Common Shares times .75 and the Repricing
Warrant shall be exercisable in whole or in part at an Exercise Price of $.001
per share at any time to and including the Repricing Date (March 24, 2000). All
other exercise or conversion rights granted to the Holder in the Repricing
Warrant are terminated.

     2. The address for giving of notice to the Company shall be as follows:

                 Telecom Wireless Corporation
                 5299 DTC Blvd., Suite 1120
                 Englewood, Colorado 80111
                 Attention: General Counsel
                 (303) 416-4000
                 (303) 221-1777 (fax)

     All defined terms in this Amendment shall have the meaning ascribed to them
in the Repricing Warrant. In the event of any inconsistency between this
Amendment and the Repricing Warrant, the terms of this Amendment shall control.

     Witness our signatures this _____ day of March, 2000.


                                     TELECOM WIRELESS CORPORATION


                                     By:
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                         Calvin D. Smiley, President and CEO

                                     HOLDER:



                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Print Name:
                                                --------------------------------



                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Signature, if held jointly
                                     Print Name:
                                                --------------------------------
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Julian E. Simpson, Respondent, v. Clover Express, Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The 'board’s findings upon the factual issues respecting New York employment and consequent jurisdiction, contested by the carrier, are supported by substantial evidence and cannot be disturbed. The issue sought to be injected by the employer, upon its separate appeal, without prior separate application for board review, was not raised before the board by the carrier’s application for review or otherwise and may not be considered here. (Work*715men’s Compensation Law, § 23; *Matter of Hedlund*v. *United Exposition Decorating Co.,*15 A D 2d 973, 975, and cases there cited, mot. for lv. to app. den. 11 N Y 2d 646.)

Decision affirmed, with one hill of costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

Gibson, P, J., Reynolds, Taylor, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.
Color photoSmall

Color photoLarge

Color photoPrint quality

Black and white photoSmall

Black and white photoLarge

Black and white photoPrint quality

For additional photos, visit the Press Room's photo area.

|Last Modified: 05/17/2013
|-------------------------
235.070-1 Indemnification under research and development contracts. ( a ) Under 10 U.S.C. 3861, and if authorized by the Secretary concerned, contracts for research and/or development may provide for indemnification of the contractor or subcontractors for— ( 1 ) Claims by third persons (including employees) for death, bodily injury, or loss of or damage to property; and
( 2 ) Loss of or damage to the contractor's property to the extent that the liability, loss, or damage— ( i ) Results from a risk that the contract defines as “unusually hazardous;”
( ii ) Arises from the direct performance of the contract; and
( iii ) Is not compensated by insurance or other means.
( b ) Clearly define the specific unusually hazardous risks to be indemnified. Submit this definition for approval with the request for authorization to grant indemnification. Include the approved definition in the contract.
[56 FR 36416, July 31, 1991, as amended at 64 FR 51076, Sept. 21, 1999; 87 FR 76995, Dec. 16, 2022]
1819.7215 Solicitation provision and contract clauses. ( a ) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.219-77, NASA Mentor-Protégé Program, in any contract that includes the clause at FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.
( b ) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.219-79, Mentor Requirements and Evaluation, in contracts where the prime contractor is a participant in the NASA Mentor-Protégé Program.
[74 FR 25672, May 29, 2009, as amended at 88 FR 69886, Oct. 10, 2023]
**Exhibit 31.1****RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION**1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Camco Financial Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of Camco as of, and for, the periods presented in thisquarterly report; 4. Camco’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) andinternal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a 15(f) and 15d15(f)) for Camco and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to Camco, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;  b. Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting andthe preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance withgenerally accepted accounting principles;  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of Camco’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusion about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by thisquarterly report based on such evaluations; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in Camco’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during Camco’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Camco’sinternal control over financial reporting.5. Camco’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of Camco’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in Camco’s internal control over financial reporting.         Date:  November 6, 2006   /s/Richard C. Baylor    Richard C. Baylor, Chief Executive Officer