alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AD Grid Sheet 

OE:H~ Docket No.: FAA-2013-***** 

Dit·cctorate Identifier: 2013-NM-008-AD 

AD Action: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

This action applies to Bombardier, Inc. Model BD-700-1 A I 1 airplanes. 

If this draft is acceptable, please legibly sign the grid to the right with your first initial 

and full last name to show concurrence with this AD. 

ONCURRENCES 

ROUTING SYMBOl. 

ANE-171 

SIGNAliJRE (Fi~>t lniuaH.;O>t Na 

T. Buffington /l Wt Nit 

1¥-/t~ 

ANE-171 

SIGNATURE (l'ir.;t lnit"l La>t a 

J. Delisio J:j~ 

L>ATE6lt-rlt1 

ROUTING SYMBOL 

ANE-171 

ANE-170 

SIGNATURE (First lnitialil <l~ t Na 

DATE 
AD Grid Sheet 

J)irccwratc: ldcntilic:r: 2111:\-i\M-IIIIS-.-\1> 

AD At:tion: l't,lic.:c ol"pn1poscd rukmaking (NI'I~~l) 

This <H.: I itlll appli~s tn Bomhardiu·. In~·. i'dodd rm . 71l!l- l/\ 11 airplane:'. 

and 

If this 

full 

dral'l is ac:.:l' ptabk. pkasl' lq.dhly sign the ~ri.J : \ 1 th~· r~ghl \lith ~~lllr Jirsl initial 

last ll:liiH: Ill :-:ho\\· \.'Oih.:urrcm:c "ilh lhi~ :\D. 

CONCIIRRE:'-:t'ES 

I·!Ot ' 11:0.4 • ~YM ~nt 

:\ l'E-171 

~ICi:'Ail Ul . .t "'''!Ji'"' v.;,, ', 

c. (itl111~7 {~ &:d./ tl.\11· 1 

ld 

r\NE-171 

~,.,-\,..,.--- ·- --

!llll , lll\1. ~\'\llllll 

ANE-171 

:\. Gall<> 

!l,\ fl 

ANL-170 

< i. Sl.'iort 11111 

ll.\ I I• 

' I•\ I I
#### 452.236-72 Use of Premises.

As prescribed in 436.572, insert the following clause:

# Use of Premises (NOV 1996)

(a) Before any camp, quarry, borrow pit, storage, detour, or bypass site, other than shown on the drawings, is opened or operated on USDA land or lands administered by the USDA, the Contractor shall obtain written permission from the Contracting Officer. A camp is interpreted to include a campsite or trailer parking area of any employee working on the project for the Contractor.

(b) Unless excepted elsewhere in the contract, the Contractor shall (i) provide and maintain sanitation facilities for the work force at the site and (ii) dispose of solid waste in accordance with applicable Federal, State and local regulations.

(End of clause)
#### Leonard Shine, an Infant, by His Father Lawrence Shine, et al., Appellants, v. Sonastone Realty Corporation, Respondent.

In a negligence action by an infant to recover damages for personal injury, and by his father to recover damages for loss of services, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by *707their brief, from so much of an order of the 'Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 24, 1964, as directed the infant plaintiff to submit to a pretrial examination at Special Term, Part II of the court. Order modified: (1) by striking out its second decretal paragraph, directing that the infant appear for pretrial examination at Special Term, Part II of said court; and (2) by substituting therefor a paragraph directing the infant to appear before the Justice presiding at Special Term, Part II, of the Supreme Court, Kings County, on a date and hour to be specified by the defendant upon 10 days’ written notice to the plaintiffs or at such other time as the parties may mutually agree in writing; and providing that, if the Justice presiding shall determine by a preliminary examination that the infant has sufficient capacity and is competent to testify, the infant shall be examined with respect to the matters specified in defendant’s notice of examination, under the supervision of the Justice presiding. As so modified, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements to plaintiffs. Since defendant is entitled to an examination of the infant if the infant be found by the court to be qualified to testify, we are of the opinion that the infant is entitled to the protection of the court in the conduct of the examination and in the determination of the preliminary issue as to his competency to be a witness *(Blagburn*v, *Milrita Realty Corp.,*204 Mise. 74; *Lester*v. *Fisdhbem,*8 A D 2d 618). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 49 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 49

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the United States Fish and 
 Wildlife Service relating to ``Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 
    Plants; Endangered Species Status for Northern Long-Eared Bat''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 30, 2023

Mr. Stauber (for himself, Mr. Wittman, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Newhouse, Mr. 
 Flood, Mr. Tiffany, Mr. Johnson of Louisiana, Mr. Perry, Mr. Smith of 
 Missouri, and Mrs. Boebert) submitted the following joint resolution; 
        which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the United States Fish and 
 Wildlife Service relating to ``Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 
    Plants; Endangered Species Status for Northern Long-Eared Bat''.

    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 United States Fish and Wildlife Service relating 
to ``Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species 
Status for Northern Long-Eared Bat'' (87 Fed. Reg. 73488; published 
November 30, 2022), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
# Rupprecht Law P. A. 3 24 Datura Street , Suite 200 | West Palm Beach, FL 33401 P: (561) 222 - 6979 | E : jon@jrupprechtlaw.com | W: www.jrupprechtlaw.com June 25 , 2015 U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12 - 140, Washington, DC 20590 RE: Description of the UA a nd Pre - flight Checklist for Precision Aerial Filmworks, Inc. (Docket FAA 2015 - 1055 ) . Dear Sir or Madam: A d escription of P recision Aerial Filmworks, Inc. ’ s UA and Pre - flight Checklist has been confidentially submitted to 333exemptions@faa.gov . If I can be of any assistance to further expedite this petition, please do not hesitate to contact me at (561)222 - 6979 or at my email jon@jrupprechtlaw.com Sincerely yours,

_____________________ Jonathan Rupprecht, Esq.2
27.304-2 Contracts placed by or for other Government agencies. The following procedures apply unless an interagency agreement provides otherwise: ( a ) When a Government agency requests another Government agency to award a contract on its behalf, the request should explain any special circumstances surrounding the contract and specify the patent rights clause to be used. The clause should be selected and modified, if necessary, in accordance with the policies and procedures of this subpart. If, however, the request states that a clause of the requesting agency is required (*e.g.*, because of statutory requirements, a deviation, or exceptional circumstances), the awarding agency shall use that clause rather than those of this subpart. ( 1 ) If the request states that an agency clause is required and the work to be performed under the contract is not severable and is funded wholly or in part by the requesting agency, then include the requesting agency clause and no other patent rights clause in the contract.
( 2 ) If the request states that an agency clause is required, and the work to be performed under the contract is severable, then the contracting officer shall assure that the requesting agency clause applies only to that severable portion of the work and that the work for the awarding agency is subject to the appropriate patent rights clause.
( 3 ) If the request states that a requesting agency clause is not required in any resulting contract, the awarding agency shall use the appropriate patent rights clause, if any.
( b ) Any action requiring an agency determination, report, or deviation involved in the use of the requesting agency's clause is the responsibility of the requesting agency unless the agencies agree otherwise. However, the awarding agency may not alter the requesting agency's clause without prior approval of the requesting agency.
( c ) The requesting agency may require, and provide instructions regarding, the forwarding or handling of any invention disclosures or other reporting requirements of the specified clauses. Normally, the requesting agency is responsible for the administration of any subject inventions. This responsibility shall be established in advance of awarding any contracts.
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 17, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-40999

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

 

AKBAR RASHADA, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 01:04-CR-9-ALL-TH

--------------------

Before BENAVIDES, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Akbar Rashada, an inmate at the federal penitentiary in

Beaumont, Texas, pleaded guilty to possessing a prohibited object

(namely, a metal weapon) within the territorial jurisdiction of

the United States. Rashada was sentenced to 27 months of

imprisonment and a two-year term of supervised release. He

argues that, in light of United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738

(2005), his sentence is invalid because the district court

applied the sentencing guidelines as if they were mandatory. We

review for plain error. See United States v. Valenzuela-Quevedo,
No. 04-40999

-2-

407 F.3d 728, 733 (5th Cir. 2005), petition for cert. filed (July

25, 2005) (No. 05-5556). 

Rashada is unable to establish reversible plain error with

regard to his Booker claim because he cannot establish that being

sentenced under a mandatory sentencing guidelines scheme affected

his substantial rights. The record does not indicate that the

district court would have reached a significantly different

result under a sentencing scheme in which the guidelines were

advisory only. See Valenzuela-Quevedo, 407 F.3d at 733-34.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
- 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 |
|                                        |

## ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT

Grantees under this program are required to submit an  annual performance report (APR) through the International  Resource Information System (IRIS). The Department  provides grantees with the required password and other information needed to  access the IRIS system. IRIS also includes a publicly accessible searchable  database of abstracts of projects funded under OPE's international education  programs.

IFLE 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
425.202 Exceptions. ( a ) The SPE shall make the determination prescribed in FAR 25.202(a)(1).
( b ) If a contracting officer proposes that the use of a particular domestic construction material should be waived for a contract on the grounds that its use would be impracticable, the contracting officer shall submit a proposed determination with supporting information through the HCA to the SPE for approval or disapproval.
[63 FR 26995, May 15, 1998, as amended at 70 FR 48, Jan. 3, 2005]
# C_2021016EN.01000101.xml

| 15.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

14 January 2021

(2021/C 16/01)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2124 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 126,21 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4393 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88943 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,1059 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0805 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 156,60 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,3108 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,190 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 359,57 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,5379 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,8738 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 8,9492 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5642 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5381 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,4005 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6853 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6090 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 330,37 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 18,4147 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,8409 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5690 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 17 026,94 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8932 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 58,232 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 89,0900 |
| THB | Thai baht | 36,396 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 6,3888 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 24,0418 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 88,6625 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2124

JPY

Japanese yen

126,21

DKK

Danish krone

7,4393

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88943

SEK

Swedish krona

10,1059

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0805

ISK

Iceland króna

156,60

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,3108

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,190

HUF

Hungarian forint

359,57

PLN

Polish zloty

4,5379

RON

Romanian leu

4,8738

TRY

Turkish lira

8,9492

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5642

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5381

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,4005

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6853

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6090

KRW

South Korean won

1 330,37

ZAR

South African rand

18,4147

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,8409

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5690

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

17 026,94

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8932

PHP

Philippine peso

58,232

RUB

Russian rouble

89,0900

THB

Thai baht

36,396

BRL

Brazilian real

6,3888

MXN

Mexican peso

24,0418

INR

Indian rupee

88,6625

---

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

---
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v. 

DANIEL DVORKIN 

 

No. 12 CR 500 

Judge Edmond E. Chang 

GOVERNMNENT’S REPSONSE TO 

MOTION FOR COMPASSIONATE RELEASE 

The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, by JOHN R. LAUSCH, JR., United 

States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois, responds to defendant’s motion 

for compassionate release (Dkt. 188), as follows. 

On August 27, 2019, defendant filed a motion for compassionate release 

seeking immediate release from the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons due to 

his age and severely declining health. Dkt. 188. 

Having reviewed the motion and confirmed certain information contained 

therein, the government agrees to defendant’s motion. 

Filed: October 2, 2019 Respectfully submitted, 

JOHN R. LAUSCH, JR. 

Acting United States Attorney 

By: /s/ Heather K. McShain

HEATHER K. MCSHAIN 

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

219 South Dearborn St., Rm. 500 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

(312) 353-1414
#### 3052.209-73 Limitation of future contracting.

As prescribed in (HSAR) 48 CFR 3009.507-2, the contracting officer may insert a clause substantially as follows in solicitations and contracts:

# Limitation of Future Contracting (JUN 2006)

(a) The Contracting Officer has determined that this acquisition may give rise to a potential organizational conflict of interest. Accordingly, the attention of prospective offerors is invited to FAR Subpart 9.5—Organizational Conflicts of Interest.

(b) The nature of this conflict is [describe the conflict].

(c) The restrictions upon future contracting are as follows:

(1) If the Contractor, under the terms of this contract, or through the performance of tasks pursuant to this contract, is required to develop specifications or statements of work that are to be incorporated into a solicitation, the Contractor shall be ineligible to perform the work described in that solicitation as a prime or first-tier subcontractor under an ensuing DHS contract. This restriction shall remain in effect for a reasonable time, as agreed to by the Contracting Officer and the Contractor, sufficient to avoid unfair competitive advantage or potential bias (this time shall in no case be less than the duration of the initial production contract). DHS shall not unilaterally require the Contractor to prepare such specifications or statements of work under this contract.

(2) To the extent that the work under this contract requires access to proprietary, business confidential, or financial data of other companies, and as long as these data remain proprietary or confidential, the Contractor shall protect these data from unauthorized use and disclosure and agrees not to use them to compete with those other companies.

(End of clause)

[71 FR 25774, May 2, 2006]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6104
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PONYA NICHELLE WRAY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (3:00-cr-00184-1) Submitted: March 29, 2007 Decided: April 6, 2007 Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ponya Nichelle Wray, Appellant Pro Se. Karen Elise Eady, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Ponya Nichelle Wray appeals the district court’s order denying her motion to reduce term of imprisonment and supervised release, filed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2000). Wray, who was sentenced pursuant to the 1991 version of the sentencing guidelines which were in effect at the time of her sentencing, asserts that subsequent amendments to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (“USSG”) § 2B1.1 would result in a lesser sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Wray is not entitled to claim retroactive application of the amendment to USSG § 2B1.1, Amendment 364, as it has not expressly been made retroactive pursuant to USSG § 1B1.10. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis 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
# C_2017179EN.01000301.xml

| 7.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/3

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

5 June 2017

(2017/C 179/04)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1249 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 124,30 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4398 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,87130 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,7448 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0856 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,4890 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,327 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 307,22 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1838 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5698 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,9562 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5040 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5174 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7651 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5769 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5541 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 258,29 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 14,3317 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,6553 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,4008 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 945,42 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,7960 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 55,585 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 63,7150 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,280 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,6660 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 20,6918 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,4020 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1249

JPY

Japanese yen

124,30

DKK

Danish krone

7,4398

GBP

Pound sterling

0,87130

SEK

Swedish krona

9,7448

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0856

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,4890

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,327

HUF

Hungarian forint

307,22

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1838

RON

Romanian leu

4,5698

TRY

Turkish lira

3,9562

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5040

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5174

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7651

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5769

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5541

KRW

South Korean won

1 258,29

ZAR

South African rand

14,3317

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,6553

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,4008

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 945,42

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,7960

PHP

Philippine peso

55,585

RUB

Russian rouble

63,7150

THB

Thai baht

38,280

BRL

Brazilian real

3,6660

MXN

Mexican peso

20,6918

INR

Indian rupee

72,4020

---

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

1

Source

---