alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
909.407-3 Procedures. ( b ) *Decisionmaking process.* ( 1 ) In actions based on an indictment, the Suspending Official shall make a decision based upon the administrative record, which shall include submissions made by the contractor in accordance with 909.406-3(b)(1) and 909.406-3(b)(3).
( 2 ) For actions not based on an indictment, the procedures in 909.406-3(b)(2) and 48 CFR 9.407-3(b)(2) apply.
( 3 ) Coordination with Department of Justice. Whenever a meeting or fact-finding conference is requested, the Suspending Official's legal representative shall obtain the advice of appropriate Department of Justice officials concerning the impact disclosure of evidence at the meeting or fact-finding conference could have on any pending civil or criminal investigation or legal proceeding. If such Department of Justice official requests in writing that evidence needed to establish the existence of a cause for suspension not be disclosed to the respondent, the Suspending Official shall— ( i ) Decline to rely on such evidence and withdraw (without prejudice) the suspension or proposed debarment until such time as disclosure of the evidence is authorized; or
( ii ) Deny the request for a meeting or fact-finding and base the suspension decision solely upon the information in the administrative record, including any submission made by the respondent.
( e ) *Notice of suspending official's decision.* In actions in which additional proceedings have been held, following such proceedings, the Suspending Official shall notify respondent, as applicable, in accordance with paragraphs (e)(1) or (e)(2) of this section. ( 1 ) Upon deciding to sustain a suspension, the Suspending Official shall promptly send each affected respondent a notice containing the following information: ( i ) A reference to the notice of suspension, the meeting and the fact-finding conference;
( ii ) The Suspending Official's findings of fact and conclusions of law;
( iii ) The reasons for sustaining a suspension;
( iv ) A reference to the Suspending Official's waiver authority under 909.405;
( v ) A statement that the suspension is effective throughout the Executive Branch as provided in 48 CFR 9.407-1(d);
( vi ) Modifications, if any, of the initial terms of the suspension;
( vii ) A statement that the respondent's name and address will be added to the EPLS; and
( viii ) If less than an entire organization is suspended, specification of the organizational element(s) or individual(s) included within the scope of the suspension.
( 2 ) If the Suspending Official decides to terminate a suspension, the Suspending Official shall promptly send, by certified mail, return receipt requested, each affected respondent a copy of the final decision required under this section.
[61 FR 39857, July 31, 1996; 61 FR 41684, Aug. 9, 1996, as amended at 74 FR 36363, July 22, 2009; 76 FR 7692, Feb. 11, 2011]
|                                        |   |                             |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------|
|                                        |   |                             |   |
| Date:      April 27, 2009    | By:    | /s/ John      S. Ippolitto  |   |
|                                        |   | Principal      Executive Officer |   |
|                                        |   | Chief      Executive Officer     |   |
|                                        |   |                             |   |

|   |   |                              |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------|
|   |   |                              |   |
|   | By:    | /s/ Michael      Kinney      |   |
|   |   | Principal      Accounting Officer |   |
|   |   | Chief      Financial Officer      |   |
|   |   |                              |   |
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

            -           Resource: STDs at Unprecedented High in the United States      

# Resource: STDs at Unprecedented High in the United States

This fact sheet (PDF, 3 pages) summarizes 2015 data on rates of chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis, based on state and local sexually transmitted disease (STD) case reports. The data show that 2015 was the second year in a row in which increases were seen in all three STDs. 

http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/factsheets/std-trends-508.pdf?utm_source=Youth.gov&utm_campaign=Reports-and-Resources&utm_medium=federal-links
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2013 - 0445 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2012 - SW - 098 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, lis t latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
In the United States Court of Federal Claims OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

(E-Filed: April 2, 2014)

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

ANN MCCLENAGHAN, * No. 12-757V

Administrator of the Estate of *

MADELINE MACKAY, Deceased, *

*

Petitioner, * Special Master

* Hamilton-Fieldman

v. * 

* Attorneys’ fees and costs; Reasonable 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Amount Requested to which Respondent

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Does Not Object

*

Respondent. *

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Ronald C. Homer, Boston, MA, for Petitioner.

Tara J. Kilfoyle, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS DECISION1

On March 25, 2014, Petitioner filed his Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (Fee 

Application). This Fee Application requested a total of $13,258.10 in attorneys’ fees and 

$1,386.01 in attorneys’ costs. Fee Application at 1. In addition, the Fee Application requested 

$776.14 for Petitioner’s out-of-pocket expenses.2

 Id. 

1 Because this decision contains a reasoned explanation for the undersigned’s 

action in this case, the undersigned intends to post this decision on the United States Court of 

Federal Claims’ website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-

347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). As 

provided by Vaccine Rule 18(b), each party has 14 days within which to request redaction “of 

any information furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in 

substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the 

disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.” Vaccine Rule 

18(b). Otherwise, “the entire” decision will be available to the public. Id.

2 Consistent with the requirements of General Order #9, Petitioner filed a 

statement delineating costs borne by counsel and Petitioner on March 27, 2014.

1

 
Respondent communicated by email with the court the same day and indicated that 

Respondent does not object to an award in this amount. The undersigned finds these amounts 

to be reasonable.

The court hereby awards the Petitioner attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of 

$15,420.25. Specifically, Petitioner is awarded a lump sum of $14644.11 in the form of a 

check payable jointly to Petitioner and Petitioner’s attorney; Petitioner is also awarded a 

lump sum of $776.14 in the form of a check payable solely to Petitioner.

In the absence of a timely-filed motion for review filed pursuant to Appendix B of the 

Rules of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, the Clerk of the court shall enter judgment in 

accordance herewith.3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman

Lisa D. Hamilton-Fieldman

Special Master

3 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing 

the right to seek review. See Vaccine Rule 11(a).

2
#### 652.229-71 Personal Property Disposition at Posts Abroad.

As prescribed in 629.402-1-70, insert the following clause:

# Personal Property Disposition at Posts Abroad (AUG 1999)

Regulations at 22 CFR Part 136 require that U.S. Government employees and their families do not profit personally from sales or other transactions with persons who are not themselves entitled to exemption from import restrictions, duties, or taxes. Should the contractor experience importation or tax privileges in a foreign country because of its contractual relationship to the United States Government, the contractor shall observe the requirements of 22 CFR part 136 and all policies, rules, and procedures issued by the chief of mission in that foreign country.

(End of clause)

[64 FR 43633, Aug. 11, 1999]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-1508
DR. ALLAN L. GANT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus U.S. DRUG ENFORCEMENT AGENCY; DOM GRANT, DEA Agent; SHERRIE LANHAM, DEA Agent; R. M. YOUNG, DEA Agent, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-982-2) Submitted: November 21, 1996 Decided: December 3, 1996 Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Allan L. Gant, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Horn, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment for the Defendants in Grant's civil rights action. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Gant v. U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency , No. CA-95- 982-2 (S.D.W. Va. Mar. 22, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### 252.225-7041 Correspondence in English.

As prescribed in 225.1103(2), use the following clause:

# Correspondence in English (JUN 1997)

The Contractor shall ensure that all contract correspondence that is addressed to the United States Government is submitted in English or with an English translation.

(End of clause)

[62 FR 34132, June 24, 1997, as amended at 65 FR 19858, Apr. 13, 2000; 68 FR 15641, Mar. 31, 2003; 71 FR 39006, July 11, 2006]
EXHIBIT 23.2





Consent of KPMG LLP





The Board of Directors


Riverstone Networks, Inc.:





The audits referred to in our report dated March 22, 2001, except as to Note 23, which is as of March 28, 2001, included the related financial statement schedule as of March 3, 2001, and for each of the years in the two-year period
ended March 3, 2001, included in the annual report on Form 10-K. This financial statement schedule is the responsibility of the Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on this financial statement schedule based on out
audits. In our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-58736) on From S-8 of Riverstone Networks,
Inc. of our reports dated March 22, 2001, except as to Note 23 which is dated March 28, 2001, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Riverstone Networks, Inc. and subsidiaries as of March 3, 2001, and the related consolidated statement of
operations, stockholders equity, and cash flows for the years ended February 29, 2000 and March 3, 2001, and May 30, 2001 related to the financial statement schedule, which reports appear in the March 2, 2002 annual report on Form 10-K of
Riverstone Networks, Inc.





/s/    KPMG LLP





Mountain View, California


May 30, 2002
#### SCHULZ, Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN OCKEY CLUB, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, .ppellate Division, Second Department.

March , 1906.)

Action by Frank A. Schulz against he Metropolitan Jockey Club.

PER CURIAM.

Judgment affirmed, with osts.

HOOKER, J.,

dissents.
Exhibit 32.1



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In  connection  with the Quarterly  Reports of  FirstEnergy  Corp.,  Ohio Edison
Company, The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, The Toledo Edison Company,
Pennsylvania  Power  Company,  Metropolitan  Edison  Company,  and  Pennsylvania
Electric Company ("Companies") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004
as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Reports"),  each  undersigned  officer  of each of the  Companies  does  hereby
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of his knowledge:

(1)  Each of the Reports fully  complies with the  requirements  of section
     13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)  The information  contained in each of the Reports fairly presents,  in
     all  material  respects,   the  financial  condition  and  results  of
     operations of the Company to which it relates.



                                                 /s/Anthony J. Alexander
                                            ----------------------------------
                                                    Anthony J. Alexander
                                                   Chief Executive Officer
                                                        May 10, 2004



                                                  /s/Richard H. Marsh
                                            ----------------------------------
                                                     Richard H. Marsh
                                                   Chief Financial Officer
                                                        May 10, 2004
#### LAHY, Respondent, v. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS R. Co., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 8, 1906.)

Action by Benjamin Lahy, as administrator of Isabella Lahy, against the Brooklyn Heights Railroad Company.

No opinion. Case settled since argument. Appeal dismissed, with costs.
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

            -           Report: Delivering Justice      

# Report: Delivering Justice

This report (PDF, 44 pages) describes OCR’s efforts during the last year to protect students’ civil rights and increase educational equity. The report includes examples of OCR’s enforcement activities, highlights of notable cases, and the guidance documents OCR released in 2015.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/ocr/report-to-president-and-secretary-of-education-2015.pdf?utm_source=youth.gov&utm_medium=federal-links&utm_campaign=reports-and-resources
#### Fred J. Luthin, Appellee, v. Village of Hinsdale, Appellant.

Gen. No. 9,581.

opinion filed December 19, 1940;

rehearing denied February 4, 1941.

Malcolm Meeartney, for appellant; Weaver & Weaver, for appellee; Wilbur Dahn, of counsel.

Opinion by

Justice Huffman.

‘ ‘Not to be

published in full.”
#### 842.705 Final indirect cost rates.

Except when the quick-closeout procedures described in FAR 42.708 are used, contracting officers shall request contract audits on proposed final indirect cost rates and billing rates for use in cost reimbursement and fixed-price incentive contracts as prescribed in FAR subpart 42.7.

[85 FR 60077, Sept. 24, 2020]
637.104-70 DOS authorities for personal services contracts. Pursuant to FAR 37.104(b), DOS statutory authorities for personal services contracts are— ( a ) For the Department, section 2(c) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2669);
( b ) For the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, section 5(a)(6) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2605);
( c ) For the Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, section 636(a)(3) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2396);
( d ) For the Foreign Service Institute, section 704(a)(4) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980, as amended (22 U.S.C. 4024);
( e ) For the Office of Foreign Missions, section 208(d) of Title II—Authorities Relating to the Regulation of Foreign Missions, of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 4308);
( f ) For the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations, section 5 of the Foreign Service Buildings Act, 1926, as amended (22 U.S.C. 296);
( g ) For the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, section 7 of the United Nations Participation Act of 1945, as amended (22 U.S.C. 287e);
( h ) For the Bureau of International Organization Affairs, the separate State Department appropriations acts; and
( i ) For the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, section 206 of Public Law 99-399, as amended by the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1998.
[53 FR 26176, July 11, 1988, as amended at 59 FR 66766, Dec. 28, 1994; 60 FR 39663, Aug. 3, 1995; 64 FR 43629, Aug. 11, 1999; 69 FR 19337, Apr. 13, 2004]
Copyright © 2003 Carolyn Gurney Willis
Copyright © 2003 Carolyn Gurney Willis
Copyright © 2003 Carolyn Gurney Willis


Copyright © 2003 Carolyn Gurney Willis