alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
32.503-15 Application of Government title terms. ( a ) Property to which the Government obtains title by operation of the Progress Payments clause solely is not, as a consequence, Government-furnished property.
( b ) Although property title is vested in the Government under the Progress Payments clause, the acquisition, handling, and disposition of certain types of property are governed by— ( 1 ) The clause at 52.245-1, Government Property; and
( 2 ) The termination clauses at 52.249, for termination inventory.
( c ) The contractor may sell or otherwise dispose of current production scrap in the ordinary course of business on its own volition, even if title has vested in the Government under the Progress Payments clause. The contracting officer shall require the contractor to credit the costs of the contract performance with the proceeds of the scrap disposition.
( d ) When the title to materials or other inventories is vested in the Government under the Progress Payments clause, the contractor may transfer the inventory items from the contract for its own use or other disposition only if, and on terms, approved by the contracting officer. The contractor shall ( 1 ) eliminate the costs allocable to the transferred property from the costs of contract performance, and
( 2 ) repay or credit to the Government an amount equal to the unliquidated progress payments, allocable to the transferred property.
( e ) If excess property remains after the contract performance is complete and all contractor obligations under the contract are satisfied, including full liquidation of progress payments, the excess property is outside the scope of the Progress Payments clause. Therefore, the contractor holds title to it.
[48 FR 42328, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 72 FR 27384, May 15, 2007]
# C_2018422EN.01001001.xml

| 22.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 422/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 422/10

---

Corrigendum to the calls for proposals under the work programme for grants in the field of the trans-European telecommunication networks under the Connecting Europe Facility for the period 2014-2020 (Commission Implementing Decision C(2018) 568)

‘CEF-TC-2018-4: eHealth’ call

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 225 of 28 June 2018
  )

(2018/C 422/08)

The European Commission, Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology, is announcing a corrigendum to the call for proposals CEF-TC-2018-4: eHealth in order to award grants in accordance with the priorities and objectives defined in the 2018 work programme for financial assistance in the field of Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) — Telecom sector, as published in the Official Journal (2018/C 225/06) on 28 June 2018.

The corrigendum to the call for proposals is available on:

https://ec.europa.eu/inea/en/connecting-europe-facility/cef-telecom/apply-funding/2018-cef-telecom-call-ehealth

---
**Exhibit 32(i)**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO

SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Penns Woods Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ronald A. Walko,Chief Executive Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) the Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 
| /s/ Ronald A.  Walko |   |
|---------------------------|--------|
| Ronald A. Walko      |   |
| Chief Executive Officer   |   |
|                      |   |
|                      |   |
| March 10, 2009       |   |

 

----
49.104 Duties of prime contractor after receipt of notice of termination. After receipt of the notice of termination, the contractor shall comply with the notice and the termination clause of the contract, except as otherwise directed by the TCO. The notice and clause applicable to convenience terminations generally require that the contractor— ( a ) Stop work immediately on the terminated portion of the contract and stop placing subcontracts thereunder;
( b ) Terminate all subcontracts related to the terminated portion of the prime contract;
( c ) Immediately advise the TCO of any special circumstances precluding the stoppage of work;
( d ) Perform the continued portion of the contract and submit promptly any request for an equitable adjustment of price for the continued portion, supported by evidence of any increase in the cost, if the termination is partial;
( e ) Take necessary or directed action to protect and preserve property in the contractor's possession in which the Government has or may acquire an interest and, as directed by the TCO, deliver the property to the Government;
( f ) Promptly notify the TCO in writing of any legal proceedings growing out of any subcontract or other commitment related to the terminated portion of the contract;
( g ) Settle outstanding liabilities and proposals arising out of termination of subcontracts, obtaining any approvals or ratifications required by the TCO;
( h ) Promptly submit the contractor's own settlement proposal, supported by appropriate schedules; and
( i ) Dispose of termination inventory, as directed or authorized by the TCO.
# C_2020359EN.01000101.xml

| 26.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 359/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 359/1

---

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

(2020/C 359/01)

Last publication

OJ C 348, 19.10.2020

Past publications

OJ C 339, 12.10.2020

OJ C 329, 5.10.2020

OJ C 320, 28.9.2020

OJ C 313, 21.9.2020

OJ C 304, 14.9.2020

OJ C 297, 7.9.2020

These texts are available on:

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

---
#### 509.403 Definitions.

*Fact-finding official* , means the Suspension and Debarment Official or a designee.

*Notice* means a letter sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the last known address of a party, its counsel, or agent for service of process. In the case of a business, such notice may be sent to any partner, principal officer, director, owner or co-owner, or joint venturer. If no return receipt is received within 10 calendar days of mailing, receipt will then be presumed.

[64 FR 37207, July 9, 1999, as amended at 74 FR 12732, Mar. 25, 2009; 81 FR 1532, Jan. 13, 2016]
#### 352.270-13 Continued Ban on Funding Abortion and Continued Ban on Funding of Human Embryo Research.

As prescribed in HHSAR 370.304(e), the Contracting Officer shall insert the following clause:

# Continued Ban on Funding Abortion and Continued Ban on Funding of Human Embryo Research (DEC 2015)

(a) The Contractor shall not use any funds obligated under this contract for any abortion.

(b) The Contractor shall not use any funds obligated under this contract for the following:

(1) The creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes; or

(2) Research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury of death greater than that allowed for research on fetuses in utero under 45 CFR part 46 and Section 498(b) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 289g(b)).

(c) The term “human embryo or embryos” includes any organism, not protected as a human subject under 45 CFR part 46 as of the date of the enactment of this Act, that is derived by fertilization, parthenogenesis, cloning, or any other means from one or more human gametes of human diploid cells.

(d) The Contractor shall not use any Federal funds for the cloning of human beings.

(End of clause)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                     19,084,624
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            19,084,624
<CGS>                                       14,641,081
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            13,186,527
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              79,512
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (8,705,928)
<INCOME-TAX>                               (2,100,810)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (6,605,118)
<DISCONTINUED>                             (4,273,964)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (10,879,082)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.47)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.47)


</TABLE>
#### Emanuel Janos et al. v. Hildreth G. Peck.

Motion to correct majority opinion of this court granted (21 A D 2d 529). Concur—Rabin, J. P., McNally, Stevens, Eager and Staley, JJ.
#### Woodlawn Union Baptist Church et al., Appellees, v. Hamilton D. Martin et al., Appellants.

Gen. No. 41,443.

opinion filed January 22, 1941.

A. L. Williams and Joseph E. Clayton, Jr., for appellants; William H. Haynes and William H. Harrison, for appellees; William H. Haynes, of counsel.

Opinion by

Justice Denis E. Sullivan.

“Not to be published in full.”
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-7340

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ERIC MARIO BYERS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca Beach Smith, Chief 

District Judge. (2:02-cr-00077-RBS-1)

Submitted: November 19, 2013 Decided: November 22, 2013

Before WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Eric Mario Byers, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph Evan DePadilla, 

Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for 

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Eric Mario Byers appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion for transcripts at Government expense. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. United States v. Byers, No. 2:02-cr-00077-RBS-1 (E.D. 

Va. Aug. 9, 2013). 

Byers also petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an 

order directing the district court to respond to his pretrial 

motions filed back in 2003. We conclude that Byers is not 

entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used 

only in extraordinary circumstances. Kerr v. United States 

Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); United States v. 

Moussaoui, 333 F.3d 509, 516-17 (4th Cir. 2003). Further, 

mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a 

clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan 

Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Because this issue 

was addressed on direct appeal, see United States v. Byers, No. 

03-4426, 2004 WL 1209015 (4th Cir. June 3, 2004) (unpublished), 

Byers does not have a clear right to the relief sought. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order, 

deny Byers’ petition for a writ of mandamus and deny his motion 

for transcripts at Government expense. We dispense with oral 
3

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
49.002 Applicability. ( a ) ( 1 ) This part applies to contracts that provide for termination for the convenience of the Government or for the default of the contractor (see also 12.403 and 13.302-4).
( 2 ) This part does not apply to commercial product and commercial service contracts awarded using part 12 procedures. See 12.403 for termination policies for contracts for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services. However, for contracts for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services, this part provides administrative guidance which may be followed unless it is inconsistent with the requirements and procedures in 12.403, Termination, and the clause at 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions— Commercial Products and Commercial Services.
( b ) Contractors shall use this part, unless inappropriate, to settle subcontracts terminated as a result of modification of prime contracts. The contracting officer shall use this part as a guide in evaluating settlements of subcontracts terminated for the convenience of a contractor whenever the settlement will be the basis of a proposal for reimbursement from the Government under a cost-reimbursement contract.
( c ) The contracting officer may use this part in determining an equitable adjustment resulting from a modification under the Changes clause of any contract, except cost-reimbursement contracts.
( d ) When action to be taken or authority to be exercised under this part depends upon the *amount* of the settlement proposal, that amount shall be determined by deducting from the gross settlement proposed the amounts payable for completed articles or work at the contract price and amounts for the settlement of subcontractor settlement proposals. Credits for retention or other disposal of termination inventory and amounts for advance or partial payments shall not be deducted.
[48 FR 42447, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 62 FR 64927, Dec. 9, 1997; 75 FR 82577, Dec. 30, 2010; 86 FR 61031, Nov. 4, 2021]
*Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 95-10818

Summary Calendar

_____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

GLYN EARL JOHNSON, also known as G,

 Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:95-CR-98-G(2))

_________________________________________________________________

April 10, 1996

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Glyn Earl Johnson appeals from his sentence following his guilty-plea convictions for

conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and money laundering. He argues that the

district court erred by failing to make a specific finding in compliance with Fed. R. Crim. P. 32

with regard to whether he was in possession of a firearm pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. The district court complied with the dictates of

Rule 32 by making a determination that no finding was necessary because the issue of Johnson's

knowledge that the guns were in his vehicle would not affect sentencing. See United States v.
2

Piazza, 959 F.2d 33, 37 (5th Cir. 1992). The district court did not err by finding that the issue of

Johnson's knowledge of the weapons had no impact upon the calculation of his sentence because

the court was permitted to infer that the weapons were reasonably foreseeable to Johnson. See

United States v. Aguilera-Zapata, 901 F.2d 1209, 1215 (5th Cir. 1990). The district court was

not required by Rule 32 to make a specific finding with regard to whether the possession of the

weapons was reasonably foreseeable to Johnson because Johnson did not argue that the weapons

were not reasonably foreseeable to him. See United States v. Esqueda-Moreno, 56 F.3d 578, 580

n.2 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 348 (1995).

Johnson's reliance upon this court's opinion in United States v. Pofahl, 990 F.2d 1456 (5th

Cir.), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 266 (1993), is misplaced. In Pofahl, the PSR alleged that the firearm

belonged to the defendant and that the defendant possessed it at the time of his offense. Id. at

1486. The defendant alleged, however, that an enhancement pursuant to § 2D1.1 was improper

because the firearm actually belonged to his roommate. Id. Thus, unlike the present case, the

issue of the defendant's possession of the weapon in Pofahl was directly in dispute and, thus, a

controverted matter. See id. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch on Law Enforcement Responses to Opioid Overdoses (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: Returning to School After a Crisis – A Guide to Addressing Traumatic Events at School      

# Resource: Returning to School After a Crisis – A Guide to Addressing Traumatic Events at School

This guide (PDF, 16 pages) is a resource for teachers and other school personnel to use in helping students cope with the aftermath of a school shooting or other traumatic events at school.**Learn more.**
#### 4.1000 Scope.

This subpart prescribes policies and procedures for assigning line items and subline items and their identifiers. However, in order to provide agencies with time to transition their information systems, agencies have until October 1, 2019, to apply the requirements of 4.1002 through 4.1008.
# C_2018400EN.01001201.xml

| 6.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 400/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 400/12

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2018/C 400/06)

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

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). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are authorised 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
  : The Republic of San Marino

Subject of commemoration
  : 420th anniversary of the birth of Gian Lorenzo Bernini

Description of the design
  : the centre of the coin features a detail from Bernini’s sculpture ‘Bust of Costanza Bonarelli’, and the dates ‘1598-2018’; at the edge, on the left is the inscription ‘SAN MARINO’, on the right the inscription ‘BERNINI’, the letter ‘R’ identifying the Mint of Rome and the initials of the artist Annalisa Masini ‘A.M.’.

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

Number of coins to be issued
  :

Date of issue
  : September 2018

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national sides of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  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).

---
# C_2021228EN.01000101.xml

| 14.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/1

---

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

(2021/C 228/01)

Last publication

OJ C 217, 7.6.2021

Past publications

OJ C 206, 31.5.2021

OJ C 189, 17.5.2021

OJ C 182, 10.5.2021

OJ C 180, 10.5.2021

OJ C 163, 3.5.2021

OJ C 148, 26.4.2021

These texts are available on:

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

---