alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The history of TRIO is progressive. It began with **Upward Bound**, which emerged out of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 in response to the administration's War on Poverty. In 1965, **Talent Search**, the second outreach program, was created as part of the **Higher Education Act**. In 1968, **Student Support Services**, which was originally known as Special Services for Disadvantaged Students, was authorized by the Higher Education Amendments and became the third in a series of educational opportunity programs. By the late 1960's, the term "TRIO" was coined to describe these federal programs.

Over the years, the TRIO Programs have been expanded and improved to provide a wider range of services and to reach more students who need assistance. The Higher Education Amendments of 1972 added the fourth program to the TRIO group by authorizing the **Educational Opportunity Centers**. The 1976 Education Amendments authorized the **Training Program for Federal TRIO Programs**, initially known as the Training Program for Special Programs Staff and Leadership Personnel.  Amendments in 1986 added the sixth program, the **Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement Program**.  Additionally, in 1990, the Department created the **Upward Bound Math/Science program** to address the need for specific instruction in the fields of math and science. The Upward Bound Math/Science program is administered under the same regulations as the regular Upward Bound program, but it must be applied for separately.  Finally, the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2001 amended the Student Support Services (SSS) program to permit the use of program funds for direct financial assistance (Grant Aid) for current SSS participants who are receiving Federal Pell Grants.

The legislative requirements for all Federal TRIO  Programs can be found in the Higher Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part A,  Subpart 2 [MS Word (217K) | PDF (188K)]. The requirements for the SSS Grant Aid can be found in Public Law  106-554.

TRIO Home | TRIO Mailbox | OPE Home
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 13

- 00336

- CV

Jeffrey Wade TEASDALE

, Appellant

v.

Jeanette Nichole

Jeanette Nichole MESSER

, Appellee

From the 216th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. 13133A

Honorable N. Keith Williams, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARION

, JUSTICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED. Costs of

this appeal are assessed against appellant.

SIGNED July 24 , 2013.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-11-0001043

26-DEC-2013

08:19 AM
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Anthony Emnino, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the County Court, Kings County, dated April 20, 1960, denying, without a hearing, his *coram nobis*application to vacate a judgment of said court, rendered October 29, 1946, convicting him on three separate counts of grand larceny in the first degree, and imposing sentence. The ground for the application is that the trial court failed to comply with section 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in that, when the jury was brought into court to report the verdict, their names were not called. Order affirmed *(People*v. *Marilla,*7 N Y 2d 319; *People ex rel. Meers*v. *Martin,*4 A D 2d 659, affd. 4 N Y 2d 898; *People*v. *Romano,*11 A D 2d 1076). Nolan, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
219.502-8 Rejecting Small Business Administration recommendations. ( b ) The designee shall be at a level no lower than chief of the contracting office.
[56 FR 36353, July 31, 1991. Redesignated at 85 FR 53683, Aug. 31, 2020]
Performance Reports

A grant under this competition, you must ensure that the necessary processes and systems are developed to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive funding under the competition.  This does not apply if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).

At the end of the project period, the grantee must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary.  If a grantee receives a multi-year award, it must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118.  The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c).  For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

Performance Measures

Under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, the Department will use the following performance measures to evaluate the success of the Augustus F. Hawkins Centers of Excellence (Hawkins) Program: 
- (a)  The number and percentage of teacher candidates who complete the teacher preparation program, disaggregated by race. 
- (b)  The number and percentage of teacher candidates, disaggregated by race, served by the funded program who become fully certified and are placed as teachers of record in high-need LEAs or hard-to-staff schools. 
- (c)  The number and percentage of bilingual and/or multilingual teacher candidates who complete the teacher preparation program.
- (d)  The number and percentage of bilingual and/or multilingual teacher candidates, served by the funded program who become fully certified and are placed as teachers of record in high-need LEAs or hard-to-staff schools.

Grantees will be asked to collect and report data on this measure in the annual performance report (EDGAR, 34 CFR 75.590).

FIPSE Home
  Last Modified: 08/03/2022
**Who May Apply (by category):** Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs), Nonprofit Organizations, State Education Agencies (SEAs)

**Who May Apply (specifically):** Consortia of state departments of education, institutions, or nonprofit organizations also may apply.

**Eligible Project Participants:**  An individual is eligible to participate in a GPA project if she/he is:

- A citizen, national, or permanent resident of the United States; and
- Currently employed full-time in a United States school system, institution of higher education, local education agency or state education agency (not applicable to students);

And at least one of the following:

- A teacher in an elementary or secondary school (please see note below);
- A faculty member who teaches modern foreign languages or area studies;
- An experienced education administrator responsible for planning, conducting, or supervising programs in modern foreign languages or area studies at the elementary, secondary, or postsecondary levels;
- A graduate student or junior or senior in an institution of higher education, who is a prospective teacher in the areas of social sciences, humanities and foreign languages.  The student should meet the provisions set by his or her local and state education agencies; or
- For the **Advanced Overseas Intensive Language Training project**, the participating student, other than those planning a teaching career, should be planning to apply their language skills and knowledge of countries vital to the United States national security in fields outside teaching, including government, the professions, or international development.

*(**Note:**  All GPA participants must be educators or students who fulfill the criteria above and the selection criteria set by their respective projects and are currently teaching and/or studying in the fields of humanities, social sciences, foreign languages, and/or area studies.  Area studies is defined as a program of comprehensive study of the aspects of a society or societies including the study of their geography, history, culture, economy, politics, international relations, or languages.  If an educator or student is working in a variety of subject areas, she/he must spend the majority of her/his time working with eligible subjects.)*



IFLE Home

|Last Modified: 01/14/2011
|-------------------------
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
PhotoMedex, Inc. and Subsidiaries:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 333-58450, 333-72580 and 333-91926) on Form S-3, in the registration
statement (No. 333-100609) on Form S-4, and in the registration statement (No.
333-30298) on Form S-8 of PhotoMedex, Inc. of our report dated February 27, 2003
(except with respect to the matter discussed in Note 9 to the consolidated
financial statements, as to which the date is March 28, 2003), with respect to
the consolidated balance sheet of PhotoMedex, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2002, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders' equity and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2002, which
report appears in the December 31, 2002, annual report on Form 10-K of
PhotoMedex, Inc.

Our report refers to our audit of the adjustments that were applied to revise
the 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements, as more fully described in
Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements. However, we were not engaged to
audit, review or apply any procedures to the 2001 and 2000 consolidated
financial statements other than with respect to such adjustments.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
March 28, 2003
2432.903 Policy. ( a ) The Senior Procurement Executive is the agency head's designee for the purposes of FAR 32.903(a).
[77 FR 73531, Dec. 10, 2012]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                      5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     Canadian Dollars
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                0.6813
<CASH>                                         2,873,324
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  742,405
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3,853,041
<PP&E>                                         23,377,976
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (8,366,066)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 18,864,951
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,138,691
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       14,234,740
<OTHER-SE>                                     3,265,046
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   18,864,951
<SALES>                                        812,723
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               944,822
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,791,451
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,846,629)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,846,629)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,846,629)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.13)
        


</TABLE>
#### 225.402 General.

To estimate the value of the acquisition, use the total estimated value of end products covered by trade agreements (*see* 225.401-70).

[70 FR 2363, Jan. 13, 2005]
Honorable Frank X. Vance 

Counts Attornev 

Medins County " 

Hondo, Texas 

Ooinion Number O-1731 

Rk: Whether or not'there is legal 

authority requrring only a 

majority vote cast in favor 

of bond issue to carry election for issuance of bonds. Dear Sir: 

Your letter of November twenty-second, requesting 

an opinion of this department on the above question, has been 

received. We quote from your letter as follows: 

"Within a few days there will be a Commissioners' 

Precinct bond election to decide whether that precinct 

can issue bonds (tax bonds) for.the purpose of'improving lateral roads, to build a new bridge and buy the 

necessary right-of-way to straighten out Highway No. 90 

through the Town of Castroville. It is doubtful if there 

will be two-thirds of the votes cast in favor of the bonds 

but everyone feels confident that a majority of the votes 

cast will be in favor of the bonds. 

"Would you advise if there is legal authority requiring only a majority of votes cast in favor of such 

a bond issue of this nature to carry the election in 

favor of issuing the bonds? It seems that under Article 

752a through 752h, a two-thirds majority is necessary.' 

The statutory authority for the issuance of road bonds 

is found under Title 22, Chapter 3, of the Revised Civil Statutes 

of Texas. 

Article 752h, reads .as follows: 

"If at such election two-thirds of the property taxpaying voters, voting at such election, cast their ballots 

in favor of the,issuance of bonds, the Commissioners' Court 

shall, as soon thereafter as practicable, issue said bonds 

on the faith and credit of said county, or political subdivision or road district, as the case may be." 

Trusting that the above satisfactorily answers your inquiry, we are 

Very truly yours 

COB-s/mm ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TIZAS 

APRROVED Dec.7,1939 

s/,GERALD C. MANN 

By~(Signed) CLAUD 0. BOOTHMAN,Assistant 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
FORM OF CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14 AND 15d-14
              UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED

CERTIFICATION

I, Joseph Gutierrez, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of AeroTelesis, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I am responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

      (a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report is being prepared;

      (b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures as of a date within 90 days of the filing date of this quarterly
report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

      (c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation
as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, 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 in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize, and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

      (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in
this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.


Date: April 26, 2005                        By /s/ Joseph Gutierrez
                                            --------------------------
                                            Joseph Gutierrez, President, CFO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

NEW PARADIGM ENTERPRISES, )

INC., d/b/a Q101, )

 )

 Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 12 C 5160 

)

MERLIN MEDIA LLC, )

)

 Defendant and Counter-Plaintiff. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

New Paradigm Enterprises, Inc. ("New Paradigm") has responded to the Counterclaim

filed by defendant Merlin Media LLC ("Merlin") in this action initially brought by New

Paradigm. Because that responsive pleading, captioned "New Paradigm Enterprises, Inc. Answer

to Affirmative Defenses, Answer to Counterclaim and New Paradigm Enterprises, Inc.

Affirmative Defenses," is problematic in several respects, this memorandum opinion and order is

issued sua sponte to address those aspects of the pleading.

To begin with, the portion of the pleading that asserts proposed answers to affirmative

defenses that Merlin had advanced in response to New Paradigm's Complaint is not a permissible

pleading -- see Fed. R. Civ. P. ("Rule") 7(a). Hence that portion of New Paradigm's pleading is

stricken.

Next, New Paradigm has inexplicably departed from the clear roadmap marked out by

Rule 8(b)(5) as the basis for obtaining the benefit of a deemed denial (see Counterclaim Answer

¶¶ 5-7 and 11-14). Each of those paragraphs is also stricken, albeit with leave granted to replead.
As long as a repleading is required in any event, New Paradigm's meaningless references

to "strict proof" (see App'x 1 to State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Riley, 199 F.R.D. 276, 278

(N.D. Ill. 2001)) are stricken as well. That locution must be deleted wherever it appears. 

Finally, New Paradigm's nonresponses in Answer ¶¶ 16 and 32 are at odds with the

directive in Rule 8(b)(1)(B). That Rule bars any such waffling nonresponse to the opposing

party's allegations. Those paragraphs must be redone as well.

Under ordinary circumstances this Court would require the filing of a self-contained

pleading to eliminate the need for a reader to move from document to document to see just what

is and what is not contested. Instead the bulk of New Paradigm's filing suggests that it be given

leave to file an amendment that simply cures the flaws identified here in the paragraphs where

those appear. That amendment must be filed on or before October 22, 2012.

__________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: October 12, 2012

- 2 -
11-i

CHAPTER 11: LIFE-CYCLE COST SUB-GROUP ANALYSIS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

11.1 INTRODUCTION .................................................... 11-1

11.2 PURCHASE PRICE INCREASES ....................................... 11-1

 EE-RM/STD-00-550 COMMENT 55
11-1

CHAPTER 11: LIFE-CYCLE COST SUB-GROUP ANALYSIS

11.1 INTRODUCTION

The life-cycle cost (LCC) sub-group analysis evaluates impacts on any identifiable

groups or customers who may be disproportionately affected by any national energy-efficiency

standard level. The Department will conduct this evaluation for the Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NOPR), in part, by analyzing the LCC and payback periods for those customers

that fall into identified sub-groups. 

The Department plans to evaluate variations in energy prices and variations in energy use

that might affect the net present value (NPV) of a standard to customer sub-populations. To the

extent possible, the Department will obtain estimates of the variability of each input parameter

and will consider this variability in its calculation of customer impacts. Variations in energy

losses for a particular type of transformer depend mainly on the varying load levels that the

transformer serves, which in turn vary on factors such as type of load, climate, and time of day. 

The Department plans to perform sensitivity analyses to consider how differences in energy use

will affect sub-groups of customers.

The Department will determine the impact on customer sub-groups using the LCC

spreadsheet model. The spreadsheet model used for the LCC analysis can be used with different

data inputs. The standard LCC analysis (described in Chapter 8) includes various types of

distribution transformers and user groups. The LCC for any sub-group, such as rural electric

cooperatives, municipal utilities, or specific classes of commercial or industrial customers, can

be analyzed using the LCC spreadsheet model by sampling only that sub-group. (Chapter 8

explains in detail the inputs to the spreadsheet used in determining LCC and payback periods.) 

11.2 PURCHASE PRICE INCREASES

As discussed in the engineering analysis (Chapter 5), the first cost of a transformer tends

to increase as its efficiency increases. Identifiable population groups, such as rural electric

cooperatives or municipal utilities, may not be able to afford significant increases in equipment

prices that might result from a standard. To avoid negative impacts on these population groups,

the Department will be especially sensitive to increases in the purchase price of transformers. 

For customer sub-groups that are sensitive to price, increases in first costs of a product can

normally delay or preclude the purchase of a new model of that product. Since distribution

transformers are an integral part of the electrical supply system, users must replace failed units

and incur the financial impacts associated with increased first costs.

 EE-RM/STD-00-550 COMMENT 55