alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### 252.217-7028 Over and above work.

As prescribed in 217.7702, use a clause substantially as follows:

# Over and Above Work (DEC 1991)

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

(1) *Over and above work* means work discovered during the course of performing overhaul, maintenance, and repair efforts that is—

(i) Within the general scope of the contract;

(ii) Not covered by the line item(s) for the basic work under the contract; and

(iii) Necessary in order to satisfactorily complete the contract.

(2) *Work request* means a document prepared by the Contractor which describes over and above work being proposed.

(b) The Contractor and Administrative Contracting Officer shall mutually agree to procedures for Government administration and Contractor performance of over and above work requests. If the parties cannot agree upon the procedures, the Administrative Contracting Officer has the unilateral right to direct the over and above work procedures to be followed. These procedures shall, as a minimum, cover—

(1) The format, content, and submission of work requests by the Contractor. Work requests shall contain data on the type of discrepancy disclosed, the specific location of the discrepancy, and the estimated labor hours and material required to correct the discrepancy. Data shall be sufficient to satisfy contract requirements and obtain the authorization of the Contracting Officer to perform the proposed work;

(2) Government review, verification, and authorization of the work; and

(3) Proposal pricing, submission, negotiation, and definitization.

(c) Upon discovery of the need for over and above work, the Contractor shall prepare and furnish to the Government a work request in accordance with the agreed-to procedures.

(d) The Government shall—

(1) Promptly review the work request;

(2) Verify that the proposed work is required and not covered under the basic contract line item(s);

(3) Verify that the proposed corrective action is appropriate; and

(4) Authorize over and above work as necessary.

(e) The Contractor shall promptly submit to the Contracting Officer, a proposal for the over and above work. The Government and Contractor will then negotiate a settlement for the over and above work. Contract modifications will be executed to definitize all over and above work.

(f) Failure to agree on the price of over and above work shall be a dispute within the meaning of the Disputes clause of this contract.

(End of clause)
2014 Open Government Plan Update

Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

ED Data Inventory

Digital Government Strategy

Improving Federal Websites

"Throughout President Obama's administration, the U.S. Department of Education has embraced new principles of open government: transparency, participation, and collaboration. Our commitment continues. Building on early successes, Open Government at the Department of Education continues to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access." — Deputy Secretary Jim Shelton, III

### ED Open Government Plan and Updates

      - Open Government Progress Update (2016)   PDF (2.97M)
      - Open Government Progress Update (2015)   PDF (738K)
      - Open Government Plan 3.0  (2014) |  PDF  (1.0M)
      - Open Government Plan 2.0  (2012) |  PDF  (1.3M)
      - Open Government Plan 1.0  (2010) |  PDF  (647K)

### Connect and Comment

      - opengov@ed.gov
      - Homeroom Blog posts: Open Government / Open Data
      - Education Community on Data.gov
      - Ed Tech Newsletter
      - ED Social Media

### Evaluating Our Progress

Self Evaluation
      - June 25, 2010    MS WORD (57 KB)  |   PDF (82 KB)
      - April 23, 2010    MS WORD (64 KB)  |   PDF (87 KB)

Evidence for our score on the Open Gov Dashboard (February 2010).

### Open Data @ ED

      - ED Data Inventory  |  ED.gov/data.json
      - ED.gov/data
      - Data.gov/education

### Open Government

      - Open Government Initiative
      - Open Government Directive
      - Data.gov

### Customer Service Plan

The Department's Customer Service Plan is designed to improve the delivery of services to our customers by redesigning the business processes and systems that impact key customer interactions.
      - Customer Service Plan  [PDF, 517KB]

### Plain Language

      - ED's Plain Language Initiative

### Scientific Integrity Policy

      - ED's Scientific Integrity Policy

### Digital Government Strategy

      - Digital Government Strategy  PDF  (680K) |  HTML5
      - ED Digital Government Strategy Report  HTML  |  JSON   (16K) |  XML   (29K)
      - ED.gov/developer

**Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review**
      - Comment on Proposed and Existing Rules and Regulations

### Archived

      - Archived Information
      - Ideas Submitted during the February 6-March 19, 2010, Public Discussion Period
      - Sunshine Week blog post , March 15, 2011
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 302 

Authorizing limited still photography of the Senate Wing of the United 

States Capitol and authorizing the release of preexisting photographs 

of the Senate Chamber and Senate Wing of the United States Capitol 

for a book on the history of the Senate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 24, 2017 

Mr. MCCONNELL (for himself, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. SHELBY, and Ms. KLOBUCHAR) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Authorizing limited still photography of the Senate Wing 

of the United States Capitol and authorizing the release 

of preexisting photographs of the Senate Chamber and 

Senate Wing of the United States Capitol for a book 

on the history of the Senate. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF TAKING OF STILL PHO3 TOGRAPHY OF THE SENATE WING AND AU4 THORIZING THE RELEASE OF PREEXISTING 

5 PHOTOGRAPHS. 

6 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—During the period beginning 

7 on the date of adoption of this resolution and ending on 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 302 ATS 

1 January 31, 2018, with respect to an individual or entity 

2 entering into a memorandum of understanding described 

3 in subsection (d), and subject to such memorandum— 

4 (1) paragraph 1 of rule IV of the Rules for the 

5 Regulation of the Senate Wing of the United States 

6 Capitol and Senate Office Buildings (prohibiting the 

7 taking of pictures in the Senate Chamber) is tempo8 rarily suspended for the release of a limited number 

9 of preexisting photographs of the Senate Chamber; 

10 and 

11 (2) taking a limited number of pictures shall be 

12 permitted in the Senate Wing of the United States 

13 Capitol and in Senate Office Buildings. 

14 (b) LIMITATION ON USE OF IMAGES.—The pictures 

15 taken under subsection (a) may only be used for produc16 tion of a book on the history of the Senate. 

17 (c) ARRANGEMENTS.—The Sergeant at Arms and 

18 Doorkeeper of the Senate, the Secretary of the Senate, 

19 and the Architect of the Capitol shall, as appropriate, 

20 make the necessary arrangements to carry out this resolu21 tion, including such arrangements as are necessary to en22 sure that the taking of pictures under this resolution does 

23 not disrupt any proceeding of the Senate. 

24 (d) PRODUCTION AGREEMENT.—The Majority Lead25 er of the Senate, the Minority Leader of the Senate, and 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 302 ATS 

1 the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee on 

2 Rules and Administration of the Senate may jointly enter 

3 into a memorandum of understanding with an individual 

4 or entity seeking to take photographs and make use of 

5 preexisting photographs for a book on the history of the 

6 Senate to formalize an agreement on conditions, locations, 

7 and times for taking such photographs and the use of the 

8 photographs taken under this resolution. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
# C_2017108EN.01000101.xml

| 6.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8419 — Segro/PSPIB/SELP/Target assets)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 108/01)

On 29 March 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8419. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8419. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             224
<SECURITIES>                                         3
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,482
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        107
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,897
<PP&E>                                           6,538
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,576
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   9,490
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,341
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           142
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,403
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     9,490
<SALES>                                         19,101
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                19,101
<CGS>                                            8,796
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,796
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,973
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  99
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,698)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (199)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,499)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,499)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.53)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.53)
        

</TABLE>
The No Child Left Behind Act amended the Department of Education Act to require the Department to establish the ‘Coordinator for the Outlying Areas’ position. School Support and Rural Programs currently employs the Departments Coordinator for the Outlying Areas, who: (1) serves as the principal advisor to the Department on Federal matters affecting the outlying areas; (2) evaluates, on a periodic basis, the needs of education programs in the outlying areas; (3) assists with the coordination of programs that serve the outlying areas; and (4) provides guidance to programs within the Department that serve the outlying areas.

As used in this section, the term outlying areas includes Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands, but does not include the Freely Associated States of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau.

|Last Modified: 05/29/2012
|-------------------------
DAVID H. WILSON,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-0852

Opinion filed May 8, 2015.

Petition Seeking Belated Appeal -- Original Jurisdiction.

David H. Wilson, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition seeking a belated appeal of the order rendered on August 5, 2014, 

denying petitioner’s second amended motion to correct illegal sentence in Taylor 

County Circuit Court case numbers 1989-409-CF, 1990-39-CF, 1990-317-CF, and 

1992-355-CF, is granted. Upon issuance of mandate, a copy of this opinion shall be 

furnished to the clerk of the lower tribunal for treatment as a notice of appeal.

LEWIS, C.J., WETHERELL and RAY, JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit 10.22

 

 

July 25, 2002

Mr. B. Ben Baldanza1225 Stuart Robeson DriveMcLean, VA 22101

Dear Ben:

As you know, US Airways, Inc. (the "Company") is implementing a financialrestructuring designed to significantly reduce its operating costs (the "2002Restructuring Program"). Part of the 2002 Restructuring Program involves changesin the compensation and benefits programs of all employees, including officers.Specifically, pursuant to this 2002 Restructuring Program:

1. your salary will be reduced by 17%;

2. your vacation time will be reduced by one week during the first year ofthe program and will be capped at a maximum of 5 weeks thereafter;

3. annual sick leave accrual will be reduced from 12 to 11 days byeliminating the accrual for August;

4. US Airways' health plan coverage will be changed to one national medicalPPO and dental plan and your contribution rate for such plans will beestablished by the Company and may be increased from time to time;

5. you will not receive any payments pursuant to the Incentive CompensationPlan for fiscal years 2002 and 2003;

6. you will not receive any payments pursuant to the Long Term Incentive Planfor performance periods ending with fiscal years 2002 and 2003; and

7. your split dollar life insurance benefit, long term disability benefit andsupplemental retirement arrangement will be based upon your salary of recordimmediately prior to the reduction of your salary.

 

----

 
Mr. B. Ben BaldanzaJuly 25, 2002Page 2

You agree that (1) the foregoing actions will not, either separately or inthe aggregate, constitute "Good Reason", as such term is defined in theSeverance Agreement entered into as of June 26, 2002 between you and the Company(the "Agreement"), (2) Section 6 of the Agreement shall be applied as if yoursalary was not reduced as described in paragraph 1 above and (3) if, pursuant tothe Agreement, you become entitled to continuation of health benefits followingyour termination of employment, the benefits to which you will be entitled willbe provided on the same basis as such benefits are provided to active seniorvice presidents of the Company, and as such benefits may be amended from time totime.

As applicable, this letter will be deemed to constitute a written amendmentto your Agreement.

Please acknowledge your agreement to the foregoing by signing this letter inthe space provided below and returning it to me.

Sincerely,

/s/ Jennifer C. McGareyJennifer C. McGarey

 

AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED

/s/ B. Ben BaldanzaB. Ben Baldanza
Current Application 

The application package in MS Word and Adobe Acrobat PDF formats will be available here:

 www.ed.gov/fund/data/award/idea
Order entered October 1, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00068-CV

ROBERT D. COLEMAN, Appellant

V.

REED W. PROSPERE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 11-02288

ORDER

We GRANT appellant’s September 14, 2013 motion for leave to file an amended brief. 

We ORDER the amended brief tendered to this Court on September 14, 2013 filed as of the date 

of this order.

/s/ DAVID LEWIS 

JUSTICE
- DDRA Fellow Alumni Panel Discussion and Application Tips: Watch on YouTube at  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Da5YM-ROF4U
- DDRA Program Press Kit:   PDF  (6.58M)
- Listen to a GoGlobalEd Podcast episode featuring Dr. Diana Chioma Famakinwa, Assistant Director, African Studies Program at the University of Wisconsin, Madison and a 2018-19 Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Dissertation Abroad Research Fellow to Nigeria:  Dr. Diana Famakinwa on the Podcast   (19:10)
- International Resource Information System  (IRIS) -- a performance reporting system and searchable database for 14 international education programs
- Fellow Search  on the IRIS website
- OPE - Other Applicant and Grantee Resources

IFLE Home
UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL

on

MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

IN RE: ZIMMER NEXGEN KNEE IMPLANT

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 2272

(SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE)

CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER (CTO−70)

On August 8, 2011, the Panel transferred 18 civil action(s) to the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Illinois for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings pursuant to 28

U.S.C. §1407. See 802 F.Supp.2d 1374 (J.P.M.L. 2011). Since that time, 287 additional action(s)

have been transferred to the Northern District of Illinois. With the consent of that court, all such

actions have been assigned to the Honorable Rebecca R Pallmeyer.

It appears that the action(s) on this conditional transfer order involve questions of fact that are

common to the actions previously transferred to the Northern District of Illinois and assigned to

Judge Pallmeyer.

Pursuant to Rule 7.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict

Litigation, the action(s) on the attached schedule are transferred under 28 U.S.C. §1407 to the

Northern District of Illinois for the reasons stated in the order of August 8, 2011, and, with the

consent of that court, assigned to the Honorable Rebecca R Pallmeyer.

This order does not become effective until it is filed in the Office of the Clerk of the United States

District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The transmittal of this order to said Clerk shall be

stayed 7 days from the entry thereof. If any party files a notice of opposition with the Clerk of the

Panel within this 7−day period, the stay will be continued until further order of the Panel.

FOR THE PANEL:

 Jeffery N. Lüthi

Clerk of the Panel

A TRUE COPY-ATTEST

THOMAS G. BRUTON, CLERK

 -

By: s/ ENJOLI FLETCHER

DEPUTY CLERK

U.S. DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN

DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

 -

May 10, 2012
IN RE: ZIMMER NEXGEN KNEE IMPLANT

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION MDL No. 2272

SCHEDULE CTO−70 − TAG−ALONG ACTIONS

DIST DIV. C.A.NO. CASE CAPTION

CALIFORNIA EASTERN

CAE 2 12−01030 Miller v. Zimmer, Inc. et al

MICHIGAN EASTERN

MIE 1 12−11739 Farrell v. Zimmer, Inc. et al

NEW YORK NORTHERN

NYN 6 12−00668 Cintron v. Zimmer, Inc. et al

OHIO NORTHERN

OHN 5 12−00956 Bunting et al v. Zimmer, Inc. et al

PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN

PAE 2 12−01335 COLBERT et al v. ZIMMER, INC. et al

PAE 2 12−02197 DIANO et al v. ZIMMER, INC., et al

PAE 2 12−02198 MARSHALL et al v. ZIMMER, INC. et al

PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE

PAM 3 12−00744 Chapman v. Zimmer Inc. et al

PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN

PAW 2 12−00525 DUNHAM v. ZIMMER, INC. et al

TEXAS EASTERN

TXE 2 12−00206 Bush et al v. Zimmer, Inc. et al
AO 450(Rev. 5/85)Judgment in a Civil Case

United States District Court

Northern District of Illinois

Western Division

Fannie Mae, et al. JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

v. Case Number: 12 C 50230

Brian Hamer, et al.

G Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been

tried and the jury rendered its verdict.

O Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues

have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendants Gillette and Wegman’s

motions to join in the cross motion for summary judgment are granted. Defendants’ motion to

dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is denied. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is granted

in part and denied in part. Defendant Hamer’s cross motion for summary judgment is granted

in part and denied in part. Defendant Acardo’s motion for summary judgment is denied. 

Declaratory judgment issued. This case is closed.

Thomas G. Bruton, Clerk of Court

Date: 2/15/2013 ________________________________

/s/ Susan Bennehoff, Deputy Clerk

Case: 3:12-cv-50230 Document #: 109 Filed: 02/15/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:1020
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                       1,306,482
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,100,563
<ALLOWANCES>                                   481,104
<INVENTORY>                                 21,293,216
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            44,803,582
<PP&E>                                       5,694,265
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,576,366
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              52,954,795
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       34,923,708
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                        73,269
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    976,755
<OTHER-SE>                                  15,446,515
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                52,954,795
<SALES>                                    101,232,305
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           101,232,305
<CGS>                                       76,319,278
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               76,319,278
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            18,797,450
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,840,489
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              4,234,586
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,539,529
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          2,695,057
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,695,057
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .36
        

</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Earthan Keitt, Appellant.

Judgment convicting defendant of the crime of robbery, first degree, and sentencing him to a term of not less than 50 nor more than 60 years, unanimously modified on the law and in the exercise of discretion, so as to reduce the sentence to imprisonment in the State prison for a term of not less than 15 years nor more than 30 years, and as so modified is otherwise affirmed. In our opinion, giving due consideration to all the circumstances — including the age of the defendant — the sentence imposed is excessive and should be reduced. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, McNally, Eager and Bergan, JJ.