alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Top of Form

Top of Form

# Preschool Development Grants

## Expansion Grants

## Technical Review Form for South CarolinaReviewer 1

### A. Executive Summary

### B. Commitment to State Preschool Programs

### C. Ensuring Quality in Preschool Programs

### D. Expanding High-Quality Preschool Programs in Each High-Need Community

### E. Collaborating with Each Subgrantee and Ensuring Strong Partnerships

### F. Alignment within a Birth Through Third Grade Continuum

### G. Budget and Sustainability

### Competitive Preference Priorities

### Absolute Priority

### Grand Total

Top of Form

Top of Form

# Preschool Development Grants

## Expansion Grants

## Technical Review Form for South CarolinaReviewer 2

### A. Executive Summary

### B. Commitment to State Preschool Programs

### C. Ensuring Quality in Preschool Programs

### D. Expanding High-Quality Preschool Programs in Each High-Need Community

### E. Collaborating with Each Subgrantee and Ensuring Strong Partnerships

### F. Alignment within a Birth Through Third Grade Continuum

### G. Budget and Sustainability

### Competitive Preference Priorities

### Absolute Priority

### Grand Total

Top of Form

Top of Form

# Preschool Development Grants

## Expansion Grants

## Technical Review Form for South CarolinaReviewer 3

### A. Executive Summary

### B. Commitment to State Preschool Programs

### C. Ensuring Quality in Preschool Programs

### D. Expanding High-Quality Preschool Programs in Each High-Need Community

### E. Collaborating with Each Subgrantee and Ensuring Strong Partnerships

### F. Alignment within a Birth Through Third Grade Continuum

### G. Budget and Sustainability

### Competitive Preference Priorities

### Absolute Priority

### Grand Total

# _1479581806.unknown

# _1479581807.unknown

# _1479581805.unknown
#### 2837.106 Funding and term of service contracts.

The HCA or designee is the agency head for purposes of FAR 37.106(b).
3047.305-70 Solicitation provisions. The contracting officer shall insert the following provisions in solicitations, as applicable: ( a ) (HSAR) 48 CFR 3052.247-70, F.o.b. Origin Information, with Alternates I or II, as applicable, shall be inserted in accordance with (FAR) 48 CFR 47.305-3(b);
( b ) (HSAR) 48 CFR 3052.247-71, F.o.b. Origin Only, shall be inserted in accordance with (FAR) 48 CFR 47.305-3(e); and
( c ) (HSAR) 48 CFR 3052.247-72, F.o.b. Destination Only, shall be inserted in accordance with (FAR) 48 CFR 47.305-4(b).
42.503-1 Postaward conference arrangements. ( a ) The contracting officer who decides that a conference is needed is responsible for— ( 1 ) Establishing the time and place of the conference;
( 2 ) Preparing the agenda, when necessary;
( 3 ) Notifying appropriate Government representatives (e.g., contracting/contract administration office) and the contractor;
( 4 ) Designating or acting as the chairperson;
( 5 ) Conducting a preliminary meeting of Government personnel; and
( 6 ) Preparing a summary report of the conference.
( b ) When the contracting office initiates a conference, the arrangements may be made by that office or, at its request, by the contract administration office.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CENTEX
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY L.P.'S JUNE 30, 1997, FORM 10-Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000818764
<NAME> CENTEX DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,277
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,240
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     36,723
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  40,533
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           500
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,702
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    40,533
<SALES>                                          3,623
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,623
<CGS>                                            2,924
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,924
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    699
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                699
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       699
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
#### Bankers Trust Company, Respondent, *v.*Jacques Nagler, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

First Department,

June 19, 1962.

*478
      *Stanley Hochroth*for appellant.

*Charles Leeds*of counsel *(Emanuel Miller,*attorney), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

Plaintiff, the owner and holder of four promissory notes, brought action against the maker after payment of such notes had been refused. The defendant in his answer generally denies the allegations of the complaint and interposes as an offset to plaintiff’s claim a debt allegedly due and owing by the payee of said notes to defendant because of payee’s failure to honor two of payee’s promissory notes.

Plaintiff moved for summary judgment pursuant to rule 113 of the Buies of Civil Practice, asserting that it is a holder in due course and as such the defense of offset cannot be raised against it (Negotiable Instruments Law, §§ 91, 96). In its supporting papers plaintiff states it discounted the notes and credited the payee-depositor’s account with the balance. In opposition defendant claims that plaintiff was merely the payee’s agent for collection. Plaintiff does not allege nor does it appear from the record that the proceeds of such notes were withdrawn or used by the payee prior to the receipt by plaintiff of notice of any defenses to payment.

The law is clear that where a bank in a case of this kind claims to be a holder in due course, not only must it show that it credited the payee’s account with the proceeds of such notes, but that the proceeds were subsequently withdrawn or availed of by the payee before it received notice of any defense *(Albany County Bank*v. *People’s Ice Co.,*92 App. Div. 47; Negotiable Instruments Law, § 93; cf. Uniform Laws, Uniform Commercial Code (1958 official text), § 3-303, Comment 3; L. 1962, ch. 533, eff. Sept. 27, 1964).

Plaintiff, on this record, has failed to meet the issue raised by appellant that it did not part with the proceeds and is therefore not a holder in due course.

Accordingly, the judgment appealed from should be reversed on the law and the facts, the motion for summary judgment *479denied with costs to the appellant, but with leave to plaintiff to renew upon a proper showing, which it is within its power to make, of the value given for the notes, the time when such value was given and the time when the notes were received.

Breitel, J. P., Rabin, McNally, Stevens and Bergan, J.J., concur.

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and the facts, with costs to the appellant, the motion for summary judgment denied but with leave to plaintiff to renew upon a proper showing, which it is within its power to make, of the value given for the notes, the time when such value was given and the time when the notes were received. Settle order on notice.
1

Medina, Dayana

From: Pettyjohn, Mary <PETTYJOHN@adeq.state.ar.us>

Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 10:43 AM

To: Medina, Dayana

Subject: RE: AECC Bailey & McClellan

Attachments: Final AECC_BART_Analysis 7 24 12s.pdf

Here it is.

From: Medina, Dayana [mailto:Medina.Dayana@epa.gov]  

Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 9:34 AM

To: Pettyjohn, Mary

Subject: RE: AECC Bailey & McClellan

Hi Mary,  

Thank you for forwarding AECC’s revised NOx BART report.  

I went back and double‐checked my email and my files, and I don’t believe I have the August 2012 revised SO2 and PM

BART report. The only SO2 and PM BART report I have from AECC is the original July 2012 version. If you have the

revised August 2012 version can you please send it to me?

Hope you have a wonderful 4th holiday as well!

Thank you,  

Dayana Medina

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6

Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division

Air Planning Section (6PD‐L)

214‐665‐7241

From: Pettyjohn, Mary [mailto:PETTYJOHN@adeq.state.ar.us]  

Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 9:12 AM

To: Medina, Dayana

Subject: FW: AECC Bailey & McClellan

Good morning Dayana,

Here is AECC’s BART NOx evaluation. Has you can see by the correspondence below the report was dated April 2013.

Also, according to Stephen Cain, AECC, the re‐submitted SO2 & PM BART and the attached NOx addresses EPA’s

comments.

Please let me know if there is anything else AECC needs to do.

Thank you and have a great 4th,

Mary

From: Stephen Cain [mailto:Stephen.Cain@aecc.com]  

Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 8:58 AM

To: Pettyjohn, Mary
# C_2018228EN.01000201.xml

| 29.6.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

28 June 2018

(2018/C 228/02)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1583 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 127,63 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4509 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88520 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,4191 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,1556 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 124,20 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,4740 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,001 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 328,07 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,3631 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,6584 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 5,3305 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5778 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5398 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,0906 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7135 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5831 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 300,27 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 16,0621 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,6728 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3820 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 598,44 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6824 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 61,960 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 73,0951 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,363 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 4,4822 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 23,2921 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 79,6830 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1583

JPY

Japanese yen

127,63

DKK

Danish krone

7,4509

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88520

SEK

Swedish krona

10,4191

CHF

Swiss franc

1,1556

ISK

Iceland króna

124,20

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,4740

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,001

HUF

Hungarian forint

328,07

PLN

Polish zloty

4,3631

RON

Romanian leu

4,6584

TRY

Turkish lira

5,3305

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5778

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5398

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,0906

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7135

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5831

KRW

South Korean won

1 300,27

ZAR

South African rand

16,0621

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,6728

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3820

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 598,44

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6824

PHP

Philippine peso

61,960

RUB

Russian rouble

73,0951

THB

Thai baht

38,363

BRL

Brazilian real

4,4822

MXN

Mexican peso

23,2921

INR

Indian rupee

79,6830

---

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

1

Source

---
32.405 Applying Pub. L. 85-804 to advance payments under sealed bid contracts. ( a ) Actions that designated agencies may take to facilitate the national defense without regard to other provisions of law relating to contracts, as explained in 50.101-1(a), also include making advance payments. These advance payments may be made at or after award of sealed bid contracts as well as negotiated contracts.
( b ) Bidders may request advance payments before or after award, even if the invitation for bids does not contain an advance payment provision. However, the contracting officer shall reject any bid requiring that advance payments be provided as a basis for acceptance.
( c ) When advance payments are requested, the agency may— ( 1 ) Enter into the contract and provide for advance payments conforming to this part 32;
( 2 ) Enter into the contract without providing for advance payments if the contractor does not actually need advance payments; or
( 3 ) Deny award of the contract if the request for advance payments has been disapproved under 32.409-2 and funds adequate for performance are not otherwise available to the offeror.
[48 FR 42328, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 50 FR 1744, Jan. 11, 1985; 50 FR 52429, Dec. 23, 1985; 72 FR 63030, Nov. 7, 2007]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RASHEED GRANT,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 243 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 31st day of October, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
EXHIBIT 21





Subsidiaries of the Registrant



|                                      |  |                             |  |                              
|------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                    |  | Jurisdiction ofOrganization |  | Percent of Common Stock Owned
|AMCORE Bank, N.A.                     |  | United States               |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|AMCORE Investment Group, N.A.         |  | United States               |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|AMCORE Consumer Finance Company, Inc. |  | Nevada                      |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|AMCORE Capital Trust I                |  | Delaware                    |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|Central States Title Company, Inc.    |  | Illinois                    |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|ARP Holdings, LLC                     |  | Delaware                    |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|AFI Nevada, Inc.                      |  | Nevada                      |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|Property Exchange Company             |  | Illinois                    |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|AMCORE Investment Services, Inc.      |  | Illinois                    |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|Investors Management Group, Ltd.      |  | Iowa                        |  | 100%                         
|                                      |  |                            
|AMCORE Real Properties, LLC           |  | Delaware                    |  | 100%
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2019189EN.01004401.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 5.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 189/44 |

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2019/C 189/12)

![Image 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/uriserv/OJ.C_.2019.189.01.0044.01.ENG.xhtml.C_2019189EN.01004402.tif.jpg)

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Greece

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins [(1)](#ntr1-C_2019189EN.01004401-E0001). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 [(2)](#ntr2-C_2019189EN.01004401-E0002), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country
: Greece

Subject of commemoration
: Andreas Kalvos — 150 years in memoriam

Description of the design
: Born in Zante, Andreas Kalvos (1792-1869) is one the most important modern Greek poets. Combining a solid neo-classicist education with the high ideals of Romanticism and archaicising with demotic Greek, he expressed both the revolutionary ideas of his time and his personal vision.

The national side of the coin features a portrait of Andreas Kalvos. Inscribed along the inner edge at the left is the name ‘ANDREAS KALVOS 1792-1869’, along with the minting year and a palmette (mintmark of the Greek Mint); inscribed along the inner edge at the right is the wording ‘HELLENIC REPUBLIC’. Also visible at the right is the monogram of the artist (George Stamatopoulos).

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Estimated number of coins to be issued
:

750 000

Date of issue
: June 2019

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2019189EN.01004401-E0001)  See [OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOC_2001_373_R_TOC) for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

[(2)](#ntc2-C_2019189EN.01004401-E0002)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation ([OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2009_009_R_TOC)).

---
#### PEOPLE, Appellant, v. GOLDING et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

December 1, 1903.)

Proceeding by the people of the state of New York against John N. Golding and another.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with §10 costs and disbursements.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           4,531
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   89,615
<ALLOWANCES>                                    27,068
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                67,253
<PP&E>                                         282,380
<DEPRECIATION>                                  92,673
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 256,960
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,591,012
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        11,869
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,508,921)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   256,960
<SALES>                                        246,853
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               246,853
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              (2,539,671)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (159,040)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,451,270)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,451,270)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,451,270)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.22)


</TABLE>
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A18A1515. ISAAC JAMALL SPANN v. WESTLAKE SERVICES, LLC.

Westlake Services, LLC filed a suit on contract against Isaac Jamall Spann. 

The trial court entered a judgment in Westlake’s favor in the amount of $7,760.99

plus court costs. Spann then filed this direct appeal. We, however, lack jurisdiction.

Where a money judgment in an action for damages totals $10,000.00 or less,

a party must follow the discretionary appeal procedures to obtain appellate review. 

See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (6). Because Spann failed to follow the required procedure,

his appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. See Hill v. Rose Electric

Co., 220 Ga. App. 603 (469 SE2d 844) (1996).

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

May 16, 2018

05/16/2018
AAUBS3B

OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

P.O. BOX 12308, CAPITOL STATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711

OFFICIAL BUSINESS.

STATE ©F TEXAS/0§f!wiW

EMAITY F<

PR8VATE USE

3/2/2015

JOHNSON, KENNETH RAY vn.. — r-^, ---.-... . On this day, the supplemental clerk's.record, in response to the order issued by this

Court, has been received and presenfedto-.trjfeeourt. A _. . Abel Acosta, Clerk

'B520

8g\

^Tr:CtTNq^R^:3;

io>

0 2 1M <$> W*£©'

0004279596 MAR10 2015

MAILED FROM SiMRCfS wa rWR?78,2^-05

PRESIDING JUDGE 20TH DISTRICT COURT

P O BOX 728

CAMERON, TX 76520 utf

'h'liiiiiil'lii,VlhiiilUH,illi',H'|['"'il'hi»ll'ill''M
# Predominantly Black Institutions (PBI) Program

# Competitive Grants 

## FY 2017 Non-Competing Continuation (NCC) Awards
# ED-GRS Honorees
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-105012, 333-120333, 333-132544, 333-146261, 333-156836, 333-168223, 333-175392, and 333-184410) of CopyTele, Inc. of our report dated January 16, 2014, with respect to our audit of the consolidated financial statements of CopyTele, Inc. as of October 31, 2013 and 2012, and for each of the years then ended, included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of CopyTele, Inc. for the year ended October 31, 2013.

 

/s/ Haskell & White LLP

HASKELL & WHITE LLP

Irvine, California

January 16, 2014