alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
');
	document.write('

**Program Office:**Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education

**CFDA Numbers:**  84.116F and 84.116X**Program Type:** Discretionary/Competitive Grants**Also Known As:** FITW

## Program Description

The FITW program is designed to support the development, replication, and dissemination of innovative solutions and evidence for what works in addressing persistent and widespread challenges in postsecondary education for students who are at risk for not persisting in and completing postsecondary programs, including, but not limited to, adult learners, working students, part-time students, students from low-income backgrounds, students of color, students with disabilities, and first-generation students.
#### 3052.228-91 Loss of or damage to leased aircraft (USCG).

As prescribed in USCG guidance at (HSAR) 48 CFR 3028.306-90(a) and (b), insert the following clause:

# Loss of or Damage to Leased Aircraft (DEC 2003)

(a) The Government assumes all risk of loss of, or damage (except normal wear and tear) to, the leased aircraft during the term of this lease while the aircraft is in the possession of the Government.

(b) In the event of damage to the aircraft, the Government, at its option, shall make the necessary repairs with its own facilities or by contract, or pay the Contractor the reasonable cost of repair of the aircraft.

(c) In the event the aircraft is lost or damaged beyond repair, the Government shall pay the Contractor a sum equal to the fair market value of the aircraft at the time of such loss or damage, which value may be specifically agreed to in clause 3052.228-92, “Fair Market Value of Aircraft,” less the salvage value of the aircraft. However, the Government may retain the damaged aircraft or dispose of it as it wishes. In that event, the Contractor will be paid the fair market value of the aircraft as stated in the clause.

(d) The Contractor agrees that the contract price does not include any cost attributable to hull insurance or to any reserve fund it has established to protect its interest in the aircraft. If, in the event of loss or damage to the leased aircraft, the Contractor receives compensation for such loss or damage in any form from any source, the amount of such compensation shall be:

(1) Credited to the Government in determining the amount of the Government's liability; or

(2) For an increment of value of the aircraft beyond the value for which the Government is responsible.

(e) In the event of loss of or damage to the aircraft, the Government shall be subrogated to all rights of recovery by the Contractor against third parties for such loss or damage and the Contractor shall promptly assign such rights in writing to the Government.

(End of clause)
- Skip to main content
- About Us
- Contact Us
- FAQs
-  Language Assistance ****   - English
  - español
  - 中文: 繁體版
  - Việt-ngữ
  - 한국어
  - Tagalog
  - Русский

U.S. Department of Education

U.S. Department of Education

            - Student Loans
            - Grants
            - Laws
            - Data

|                                        |
|----------------------------------------|
|                                        | PurposeFunding StatusEligibilityLaws, Regs, & GuidanceApplicant InfoResourcesAwardsFAQsPerformanceContacts |  |
| Office of Postsecondary Education Home |
|                                        |

## Key Staff

**Ashley Hillary**Competition Program ManagerAugustus F. Hawkins Centers of Excellence (Hawkins) ProgramPhone:	202-453-7880Email: Ashley.Hillary@ed.gov

**Mailing Address:**Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary EducationU.S. Department of Education, OPEAugustus F. Hawkins Centers of Excellence (Hawkins) Program400 Maryland Avenue, S.W.Mail Stop LBJ-2C143Washington, DC 20202**E-mail:**fipse@ed.gov

FIPSE Home

----

 

 Printable view

## How Do I Find...

          - Student loans, forgiveness
          - Higher Education Rulemaking
          - College accreditation
          - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
          - FERPA
          - FAFSA
          - 1098, tax forms

More >

## Information About...

          - Elevating Teaching
          - Early Learning
          - Engage Every Student
          - Unlocking Career Success
          - Cybersecurity

 

----

*Our mission*

Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers

Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a Grant

Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website

Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works ClearinghouseOpen Data PlatformCOVID Relief Data

About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy Program

----

          - Notices
          - FOIA
          - Privacy Policy
          - Accessibility
          - Security
          - Information quality
          - Inspector General
          - Whitehouse.gov
          - USA.gov
          - Benefits.gov
          - Regulations.gov
          - vote.gov
Overview | **Guidelines** | Information Correction Requests and Appeals | Contact

## Guidelines

- Guidelines
- Information Correction Requests and Appeals 
- Contact Program Office

In the Department of Education's correction request process, the burden of proof  rests with the requester. An affected person who believes that Department information does not adhere to the information quality guidelines  of OMB or the Department, or an office of the Department that has issued program-specific  guidelines, and who would like to request correction of specific information,  needs to provide the following information:

- Identification of the requester ( i.e.,  name, mailing address, telephone    number, and organizational affiliation, if any);
- A detailed description of the information that the requester believes does not comply with the Department's or OMB's guidelines, including name of the information collection, if it was part of an information collection; the disseminating office and author, if known; and a description of the specific item in question;
- Potential impacts on the requester from the information identified for    correction ( i.e ., describe the requester's interest in the information    and how the requester is affected by the information in question); and
- An explanation of the reason(s) that the information should be corrected    ( i.e ., describe clearly and specifically the elements of the information    quality guidelines that were not followed) and
- A detailed description of the attempt(s) the requester made to consult with and resolve information quality issues directly with the contact person listed with the information product (as noted above).

Requesters shall submit requests to the following address: “InformationQuality@ed.gov.” Requesters should indicate that they are submitting an Information Quality Request in the subject line of the e-mail.

----

- Previous
- Table of Contents
- Next
237.7701 Definition. As used in this subpart— *Nonprofit organization* means any organization that is— ( 1 ) Described in section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and
( 2 ) Exempt from tax under section 501(a) of that Code.
# C_2019069EN.01000101.xml

| 22.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

21 February 2019

(2019/C 69/01)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1354 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 125,70 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4619 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,86805 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,6188 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1367 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 135,70 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,7808 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,648 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 317,24 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3346 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,7565 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 6,0442 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5969 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4951 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,9098 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6648 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5352 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 277,61 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,8539 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,6275 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4155 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 978,50 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6320 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,193 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 74,3534 |
| THB | Thai baht | 35,390 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,2476 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 21,8165 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 80,7435 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1354

JPY

Japanese yen

125,70

DKK

Danish krone

7,4619

GBP

Pound sterling

0,86805

SEK

Swedish krona

10,6188

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1367

ISK

Iceland króna

135,70

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,7808

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,648

HUF

Hungarian forint

317,24

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3346

RON

Romanian leu

4,7565

TRY

Turkish lira

6,0442

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5969

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4951

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,9098

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6648

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5352

KRW

South Korean won

1 277,61

ZAR

South African rand

15,8539

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,6275

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4155

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 978,50

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6320

PHP

Philippine peso

59,193

RUB

Russian rouble

74,3534

THB

Thai baht

35,390

BRL

Brazilian real

4,2476

MXN

Mexican peso

21,8165

INR

Indian rupee

80,7435

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Juan Jose RINCON-NIETO, Appellant.

No. 08-1145.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: May 13, 2008.

Filed: June 17, 2008.

Andrew H. Kahl, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Des Moines, IA, U.S. Attorney’s Office, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

James F. Whalen, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Southern District of Iowa, Des Moines, IA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Juan Jose Rincon-Nieto, Des Moines, IA, pro se.

Before RILEY, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Juan Jose Rincon-Nieto (Rincon-Nieto) pled guilty to a charge of illegal reentry by a previously deported alien, in violation of 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(a) and (b)(2). The presentence report determined (1) Rincon-Nieto’s base offense level was 8, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(a); and (2) Rincon-Nieto was subject to a 16-level increase under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii) because he was deported after conviction for a felony crime of violence. After a three-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility, Rincon-Nieto’s total offense level was 21, and with a criminal history category of IV, his resulting sentencing range was 57-71 months. The district court1
      *644sentenced Rincon-Nieto to 57 months imprisonment. On appeal, Rincon-Nieto contends the district court erred in finding that a State of Iowa conviction for an aggravated misdemeanor crime of domestic assault, which was subject to an enhanced sentence punishable by up to two years imprisonment based on a prior domestic assault conviction, was a felony crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(A)(ii), cmt. n. 2 (defining a felony offense as “any federal, state, or local offense punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year”).

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in *United States v. Rodriquez,*558 U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 1783, 170 L.Ed.2d 719 (2008), supplies persuasive authority. In *Rodriquez,*the Court held a state enhancement based on a recidivist provision is applicable to a determination of a maximum term of imprisonment under the Armed Career Criminal Act. *Id.*at 1793. Following the *Rodriquez*reasoning, by analogy, the district court was correct in finding Rineon-Nieto’s 2003 Iowa conviction for a recidivist enhanced domestic assault qualified as a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, thereby supporting the 16-level enhancement. Contrary to Rincon-Nieto’s argument, a defendant’s prior record of convictions is relevant to an evaluation of the seriousness of the subject state conviction. *Id.*at 1789. We affirm.

. The Honorable Robert W. Pratt, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.
#### 3.102 [Reserved]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6914

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

KWAME DEMETT BINTA, a/k/a Karl D. Bolling,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (CR-00-144-R; CA-02-595)

Submitted: August 20, 2004 Decided: September 7, 2004

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kwame Demett Binta, Appellant Pro Se. Paul Joseph McNulty, United

States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, Stephen Wiley Miller, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Kwame Demett Binta seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255

(2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a

§ 2255 proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Binta has not made the requisite showing.

Accordingly, we deny Binta’s motion for a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-2 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:22

Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-2 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:23
Exhibit 31.a
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Roger H. Ballou, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of CDI Corp.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
 a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based upon suchevaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based onour most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.
Date: August 5, 2004       By: /s/ Roger H. Ballou       Roger H. Ballou   President and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements of CCB Financial Corporation and
Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996 and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         201,521
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          62,712
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               185,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    897,102
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          82,238
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            86,479
<LOANS>                                      3,771,423
<ALLOWANCE>                                     49,023
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,384,110
<DEPOSITS>                                   4,589,534
<SHORT-TERM>                                   159,251
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             99,246
<LONG-TERM>                                     57,848
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        75,411
<OTHER-SE>                                     402,820
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               5,384,110
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                321,696
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               60,992
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                15,076
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               397,764
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             170,998
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             181,348
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          216,416
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   12,800
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 505
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                161,438
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                104,767
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     104,767
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    70,315
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     4.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     4.67
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.70
<LOANS-NON>                                     11,271
<LOANS-PAST>                                     3,066
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  7,708
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                43,578
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    9,612
<RECOVERIES>                                     2,257
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               49,023
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            49,023
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          7,211
        

</TABLE>
237.7001 Method of acquisition. ( a ) *Requirements type contract.* By agreement among the military activities, one activity in each geographical area will contract for the estimated requirements for the care of remains for all military activities in the area. Use a requirements type contract (see FAR 16.503) when the estimated annual requirements for the activities in the area are ten or more.
( b ) *Purchase order.* Where no contract exists, use DD Form 1155, Order for Supplies or Services, to obtain mortuary services.
Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:13

Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 2 of 9 PageID #:14

Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 3 of 9 PageID #:15

Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 4 of 9 PageID #:16

Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 5 of 9 PageID #:17

Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 6 of 9 PageID #:18

Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 7 of 9 PageID #:19

Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 8 of 9 PageID #:20

Case: 1:12-cv-02343 Document #: 1-1 Filed: 03/29/12 Page 9 of 9 PageID #:21
#### 252.227-7032 Rights in technical data and computer software (foreign).

As prescribed in 227.7103-17, use the following clause:

# Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software (Foreign) (JUN 1975)

The United States Government may duplicate, use, and disclose in any manner for any purposes whatsoever, including delivery to other governments for the furtherance of mutual defense of the United States Government and other governments, all technical data including reports, drawings and blueprints, and all computer software, specified to be delivered by the Contractor to the United States Government under this contract.

(End of clause)

[56 FR 36479, July 31, 1991, as amended at 60 FR 33505, June 28, 1995]
**Overview**        Below are Frequently Asked Questions on OCR's work, including information related to our areas of enforcement and the Civil Rights Data Collection.                

----

 
              - **OCR's Complaint Process Frequently Asked Questions**
              - **Race and National Origin Discrimination Frequently Asked Questions**
              - **Sex Discrimination Frequently Asked Questions**
              - **Disability Discrimination Frequently Asked Questions**
              - **Age Discrimination Frequently Asked Questions**
              - **Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act Frequently Asked Questions***(Under Construction)*
              - **CRDC Frequently Asked Questions**
              - **Reading Room**
              - **Topics A to Z**