alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
37.101 Definitions. As used in this part— *Adjusted hourly rate (including uncompensated overtime)* is the rate that results from multiplying the hourly rate for a 40-hour work week by 40, and then dividing by the proposed hours per week which includes uncompensated overtime hours over and above the standard 40-hour work week. For example, 45 hours proposed on a 40-hour work week basis at $20 per hour would be converted to an uncompensated overtime rate of $17.78 per hour ($20.00 × 40/45 = $17.78).
*Child care services* means child protective services (including the investigation of child abuse and neglect reports), social services, health and mental health care, child (day) care, education (whether or not directly involved in teaching), foster care, residential care, recreational or rehabilitative programs, and detention, correctional, or treatment services.
*Nonpersonal services contract* means a contract under which the personnel rendering the services are not subject, either by the contract's terms or by the manner of its administration, to the supervision and control usually prevailing in relationships between the Government and its employees.
*Performance-based contracting* means structuring all aspects of an acquisition around the purpose of the work to be performed as opposed to either the manner by which the work is to be performed or broad and imprecise statements of work.
*Service contract* means a contract that directly engages the time and effort of a contractor whose primary purpose is to perform an identifiable task rather than to furnish an end item of supply. A service contract may be either a nonpersonal or personal contract. It can also cover services performed by either professional or nonprofessional personnel whether on an individual or organizational basis. Some of the areas in which service contracts are found include the following: ( 1 ) Maintenance, overhaul, repair, servicing, rehabilitation, salvage, modernization, or modification of supplies, systems, or equipment.
( 2 ) Routine recurring maintenance of real property.
( 3 ) Housekeeping and base services.
( 4 ) Advisory and assistance services.
( 5 ) Operation of Government-owned equipment, real property, and systems.
( 6 ) Communications services.
( 7 ) Architect-Engineering (see subpart 36.6).
( 8 ) Transportation and related services (see part 47).
( 9 ) Research and development (see part 35).
*Uncompensated overtime* means the hours worked without additional compensation in excess of an average of 40 hours per week by direct charge employees who are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act. Compensated personal absences such as holidays, vacations, and sick leave shall be included in the normal work week for purposes of computing uncompensated overtime hours.
[48 FR 42365, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 53 FR 43392, Oct. 26, 1988; 59 FR 67051, Dec. 28, 1994; 62 FR 44815, Aug. 22, 1997; 66 FR 2133, Jan. 10, 2001; 72 FR 27385, May 15, 2007; 80 FR 4993, Jan. 29, 2015]
#### County of Erie, Appellant-Respondent, v. Lafayette Hotel Company, Respondent-Appellant, Western New York Motor Lines, Inc., Respondent, et al., Defendants.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied. Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
Exhibit 32.11


                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION
                        OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
                         CENTRAL ILLINOIS LIGHT COMPANY
                         (required by Section 906 of the
                           Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)


In connection with the report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly  period ended March
31, 2004 of Central  Illinois  Light  Company (the  "Company") as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), I, Gary
L. Rainwater,  chief executive officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

(1)  The Form 10-Q fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section  13(a) or
     15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2)  The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated: May 10, 2004



                                         /s/ Gary L. Rainwater
                                         ------------------------------------
                                         Gary L. Rainwater
                                         Chairman, President and
                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                         (Principal Executive Officer)
#### Falvain De Boissiere et al., Respondents, v Richard Raskin et al., Appellants.

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County, entered September 28, 1977, which is in favor of plaintiffs and against them, upon a directed verdict as to liability and a jury verdict as to damages. Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. O’Connor, J. P., Shapiro and Hargett, JJ. concur.

Cohalan, J.,

concurs insofar as the majority has affirmed the judgment in favor of plaintiffs Joseph and Kathryn D’Agostino, but otherwise dissents and votes to reverse the judgment in favor of plaintiff De Boissiere and to grant a new trial as between said plaintiff and defendants, limited to the issue of damages only, unless said plaintiff stipulates in writing to reduce the verdict in his favor to $40,000, with the following memorandum: Following the trial as to liability, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants. The Justices in the majority and I agree that the Trial Judge properly set aside that verdict. The amount of the verdict in favor of plaintiff De Boissiere was not warranted on this record (cf. *Senko v Fonda,*
      *67653 AD2d 638). The finding of liability against the defendants, and the damages awarded to plaintiffs Joseph and Kathryn D’Agostino, are both supported by the evidence adduced at the trials.
# C_2017105EN.01000201.xml

| 4.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 105/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 105/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8370 — Amundi Immobilier/Malakoff Mederic/TAS Kapstadtring 2)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 105/03)

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 32017M8370. 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 32017M8370. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
3413.303-5 Purchases under BPAs. ( b ) Individual purchases under blanket purchase agreements for commercial items may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold but shall not exceed the threshold for the test program for certain commercial items in FAR 13.500(a).
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

The National Science Board's Committee on Science and Engineering Policy hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business as follows:

# TIME AND DATE:

Friday, February 12, 2021, from 3:00-3:30 p.m. EST.

# PLACE:

This meeting will be held by teleconference through the National Science Foundation.

# STATUS:

Open.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

The agenda of the teleconference is: Chair's opening remarks; discussion of the narrative outline for the Science and Engineering Indicators 2022 thematic report on Science and Technology: Public Perceptions, Awareness, and Information Sources.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

                        Point of contact for this meeting is: Reba Bandyopadhyay,                         *rbandyop@nsf.gov,*                         703/292-7000. To listen to this teleconference, members of the public must send an email to                         *nationalsciencebrd@nsf.gov*                         at least 24 hours prior to the teleconference. The National Science Board Office will send requesters a toll-free dial-in number. Meeting information and updates may be found at                         *https://www.nsf.gov/​nsb/​meetings/​index.jsp.*                         Please refer to the National Science Board website at                         *www.nsf.gov/​nsb*                         for general information.                    

Chris Blair,

Executive Assistant to the National Science Board Office.

[FR Doc. 2021-02700 Filed 2-5-21; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
# C_2016477EN.01000102.xml

| 21.12.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 477/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.12.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 477/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8231 — Kuoni Travel Holding/MTS Globe)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 477/02)

On 15 November 2016, 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 32016M8231. 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 32016M8231. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
#### In the Matter of the Estate of Mary C. King, Deceased. Oscar Stoffreiden, Appellant; Helen K. Daly et al., Respondents.

Motion by respondents Daly and Peterson to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, and appeal dismissed. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.
317.104 General. ( b ) The Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) is the agency approving official for determinations under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 17.104(b).
# C_2020061EN.01000101.xml

| 24.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/1

---

Last publications of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Official Journal of the European Union

(2020/C 61/01)

Last publication

OJ C 54, 17.2.2020

Past publications

OJ C 45, 10.2.2020

OJ C 36, 3.2.2020

OJ C 27, 27.1.2020

OJ C 19, 20.1.2020

OJ C 10, 13.1.2020

OJ C 432, 23.12.2019

These texts are available on:

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K 
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE 
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                          68,771
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,287,332
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (40,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  3,222,841
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,861,485
<PP&E>                                       2,445,573
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,956,440)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,652,275
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,275,538
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,092
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,277,515
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,652,275
<SALES>                                     10,146,506
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,146,506
<CGS>                                        4,964,673
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,880,841
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              44,959
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                220,706
<INCOME-TAX>                                    83,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   137,706
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .02
        

</TABLE>
#### Ruth Carlson, Appellant, v. Clarence O. Carlson, Appellee.

Gen. No. 41,489.

opinion filed February 26, 1941.

Zaleski & Zaleski, for appellant; Cooney & Verhoeven, for appellee.

Opinion 'by

Justice Denis E. Sullivan.

“Not to be published in full.’’
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 130 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 130

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
   United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Railroad 
  Administration relating to ``Train Crew Size Safety Requirements''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 19, 2024

Mr. Burlison (for himself, Mr. Perry, and Mr. Weber of Texas) submitted 
the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
   United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Railroad 
  Administration relating to ``Train Crew Size Safety Requirements''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Federal Railroad Administration relating to 
``Train Crew Size Safety Requirements'' (89 Fed. Reg. 25052; published 
April 9, 2024), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
UNCLASSIFIEDIIFOR PUBLIC RELEASE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBItned W\t~h c\a:S\f\e~t1cer 

____________________________.. lnf~____ 

MOHAMMED AL-ANSI, et al. I C1SO ~ 

nate 


Petitioners, 


v. 	 civil Action No. 08-1923 (GK) 

BARACK H. OBAMA, et al., 

Respondents. 

ORDER 

Petitioner has filed a Motion for Leave to File Motion to 

Compel Additional Discovery. Upon consideration of the Motion, the 

opposition, the Reply, the Exhibits, and the entire record herein, 

it is hereby 

ORDERED, that Petitioner's Motion for 	Leave to File Motion to 

Compel Additional Discovery is denied 	without prejudice; and it is 

further 

ORDERED, that Petitioner may file an appropriate motion on 

this issue when the Supreme court has ruled on a petition for writ 

of certiorari, or the time for filing such a petition has passed, 

in Uthman v. Obama, 637 F.3d 400 (D.C. Cir. 2011). 

August 4, 2011 	 Gladys Kessler 

United States District Judge 

UNCLASSIFIEDIIFOR PUBLIC RELEASE
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Salvador RAMIREZ-MORA, also known as Victor Ramirez-Pena, also known as Salvador M Ramirez, also known as Salvador Mora Ramirez, also known as Jose Ramirez, also known as Salvador Ramirez-Morales, also known as Juan Ramirez Garcia, Defendant-Appellant. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Salvador Ramirez-Mora, also known as Victor Ramirez-Pena, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 07-50473, 07-50483

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Nov. 8, 2007.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*461Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before KING, BARKSDALE, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgments in Criminal Cases, Salvador Ramirez-Mora raises arguments that are foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. *See United States v. Pineda-Arrellano,*492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir.2007), *petition for cert. filed*(Aug. 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgments of the district court are AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           6,578
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              15
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 5,080
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     24,505
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          42,671
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            43,071
<LOANS>                                        122,938
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,616
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 205,878
<DEPOSITS>                                     178,153
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              3,002
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,113
<OTHER-SE>                                      23,610
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 205,878
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 11,417
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                3,407
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   246
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                15,070
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               6,970
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,970
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            8,100
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      135
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  5,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,447
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,660
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,660
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.39
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.71
<LOANS-NON>                                        390
<LOANS-PAST>                                       462
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    898
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,523
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       95
<RECOVERIES>                                        53
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,616
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Archie Walker, as Guardian ad Litem for Margaret Walker, Petitioner, v Carmen Shang, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to review a determination of the respondent Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, dated September 22, 1977 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency denying Margaret Walker’s application for medical assistance. Petition granted to the extent that the determination is annulled, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and respondents are directed to provide medical assistance to Margaret Walker from the date of her application. Proceeding otherwise dismissed. The determination was not supported by substantial evidence. Suozzi, J. P., O’Connor, Lazer and Gulotta, JJ., concur.