alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1590.4 Application process. ( a ) An applicant seeking to enter into an agreement with FAS must submit an application, in accordance with this section, that sets forth its proposal to carry out activities under the USDA LRP Program in a proposed target country(ies). An application must contain the items specified in paragraph (b) of this section and any other items required by the notice of funding opportunity and must be submitted electronically to FAS at the address set forth in the notice of funding opportunity.
( b ) An applicant must include the following items in its application: ( 1 ) A completed Form SF-424, which is a standard application for Federal assistance;
( 2 ) An introduction and impact analysis, as specified in the notice of funding opportunity;
( 3 ) A plan of operation that contains the elements specified in the notice of funding opportunity;
( 4 ) A summary line item budget and a budget narrative that indicate: ( i ) The amount(s) of any FAS-provided funds, program income, and voluntary committed cost sharing or matching contributions that the applicant proposes to use to fund: ( A ) Administrative costs;
( B ) Commodity procurement costs, including costs for locally and regionally procured commodities, and food vouchers;
( C ) Transportation, storage, and handling costs; and
( D ) Activity costs;
( ii ) Where applicable, how the applicant's indirect cost rate will be applied to each type of expense; and
( iii ) The amount of funding that will be provided to each proposed subrecipient under the agreement;
( 5 ) A project-level results framework that outlines the changes that the applicant expects to accomplish through the proposed project and is based on the USDA LRP Program-level results framework;
( 6 ) Unless otherwise specified in the notice of funding opportunity, an evaluation plan that describes the proposed design, methodology, and time frame of the project's evaluation activities, and how the applicant intends to manage these activities, and that will include a baseline study, interim evaluation, final evaluation, and any applicable special studies; and
( 7 ) Any additional required items set forth in the notice of funding opportunity.
( c ) Each applicant (unless the applicant has an exception approved by FAS under 2 CFR 25.110(d)) is required to: ( 1 ) Be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) before submitting its application;
( 2 ) Provide a valid unique entity identifier in its application; and
( 3 ) Continue to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal award or an application or plan under consideration by a Federal awarding agency.
#### Saratoga Harness Racing Association, Inc., Appellant-Respondent, v. Agriculture and New York State Horse Breeding Development Fund, Respondent-Appellant.

Decision dated December 30, 1966 [27 A D 2d 631], amended, and order entered January 25, 1967, resettled to provide as follows: *“*Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, so as to direct summary judgment in favor of respondent-appellant for $45,222.89, with interest at the legal rate from February 1, 1966, and as so modified, affirmed, with costs.” Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Aulisi, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5
<LEGEND>
ART. 5 FDS FOR 10-K
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000
       
<S>                                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                         YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                     APR-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                          APR-30-1996
<CASH>                                                      9,260
<SECURITIES>                                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                              16,667
<ALLOWANCES>                                                1,752
<INVENTORY>                                                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                0
<PP&E>                                                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             22,736
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                           0
<BONDS>                                                    26,408
<COMMON>                                                    1,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                           0
<PREFERRED>                                                     0
<OTHER-SE>                                                 (7,514)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               22,736
<SALES>                                                     2,610
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            2,610
<CGS>                                                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                   0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              973
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                              957
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          1,919
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            (1,238)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        (1,238)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                 0
<CHANGES>                                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                               (1,238)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                   0
        

</TABLE>
#### Ashby’s Exr’s. *vs.*Moore’s Adm'x.

Covenant. Case 42.

Error -o the Fayette ironit; Hickey, Judge.

Warranty, *Covenant of. Administrator.*DecTaration, Eviction, *Averment of.*

In an action tor on a covcuan! *<•>*co„vey land, the de, laratiou must shew that the breach look place in ¡he life time- of the coicnnntee.

For a breach ol covenant of warranty ina deed of conve- anco, action is in the heir, if he e'enst,°fter the deuth'oMhe6 covenantee,

Vi h< n an ad-'me'ibr'^ bn-a ToAi covenant of ■warrant!, adc'ec'ofconve vanee of land to declara must a] 1 odvo th»i the *evic*r° c * *'in t]ie 'life time of hh intestate,*

April 7.

Judge Nicholas

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

Thf. Defendant in error as Administratrix of Moore, sued *the*Plaintiffs in error as Ex-ecu(;0rs heirs and devisees of N Ashby, in covenant, on the covenant ol warrantee contained in a deed of conveyance from said Ashby and J. B. 3anu-ary ¡_0 jyjoore of a tract of land, and obtained a ver- ... , . , , diet and judgment.

The assignment of errors question the sufficiency of the declaration, because it does not shew that the eviction alleged took place in the life lime of Moore. The case of Abney *vs.*Brownlee, II. Bibb, 170, deckles, that in- an action by an executor on a covenant to convey ]alK| the declaration must shew that the . * , , . , . „ . breach took place m the life tune of the covenantee, The case of Hatcher *vs.*Galloway, II. Bibb, 180, determines, that for a breach of covenant of warrantce m a deed ol conveyance, the right of action is in the heir, if the eviction happens after tlie death *L^e covenantee. An averment was therefore necessary in this case, to shew that the alleged eviction took place in the lifetime of Moore, and *the*declaration is bad for the want of it.

^ *s a^so °^Íecte(* that the declaration shews a conveyance of the land from Moore to another in whom it is contended the right of action is, as the declaration does not aver any conveyance of *the*title to Moore, or satisfaction made by him to the alienee This conclusion would lie just if the prewere true, but we do not consider the lan* °f the declaration equivalent- to an express averment that Moore had conveyed his title to another. If, as has been suggested, such was the fact, anc‘ *n truth the eviction took place after the death of Moore, and his alienee then sued and recovered satisfaction from his administratrix, whether the-rigid of action would or would not thereby revert and accrue to her, is a question not now presented by the record, and we do not feel at liberty to express the inclination of our opinion.

*165*Turner*and *Hoggin*for plaintiffs; *Chinn*for. defendants.

As the cause must be reversed for the insufficiency of the declaration, the other assignments of error need not be noticed. But to prevent the recurrence of similar error, we will suggest that the judgment is totally defective as to the form of it.

The judgment is reversed and cause remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. The plaintiffs in error must recover their costs.
#### § 202.3 Institution of proceedings.

Any person having information of any violation of the Act or of any of the regulations promulgated thereunder may file with the Director an application requesting the institution of such proceedings as may be authorized under the Act. Such application shall be in writing, signed by or on behalf of the applicant, and shall contain a short and simple statement of the facts constituting the alleged violation and the name and address of the applicant and the party complained of. If, after investigation of the matters complained of in the application or after investigation made on his own motion, the Director has reason to believe that any person has violated or is violating any of the provisions of the Act or the regulations made and promulgated thereunder, he may institute such proceedings as may be authorized by the Act.
#### § 1737.92 Loan documents.

Following approval of the loan, RUS shall forward the necessary loan documents to the borrower for execution, delivery, recording, and filing, as directed by RUS. See 7 CFR part 1758 for details (or RUS Bulletins 320-4, 320-22, 321-2, 322-2, 323-1, or 326-1).
EX-3.8
  CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT TO ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION

                   Certificate of Amendment to
                    Articles of Incorporation
                  For Nevada Profit Corporation
  (Pursuant to NRS 78.385 and 78.390 - After Issuance of Stock)


1.  Name of corporation: Synthetic Turf Corporation of America

2.  The articles have been amended as follows (provide article
numbers, if available):

The folowing new articles are added:

An increase in the authorized capital stock of the Corporation can be
approved by the Board of Directors of the Corporation without
shareholder consent; and

A decrease in the issued and outstanding common stock of the
Corporation can be approved by the Board of Directors without
shareholder consent.

3.  The vote by which the stockholders holding shares in the
corporation entitling them to exercise at least a majority of the
voting power, or such greater proportion of the voting power as may be
required in the case of a vote by classes or series, or as may be
required by the provisions of the articles of incorporation have voted
in favor of the amendment is: 56,100,000*

4.  Effective date of filing (optional):
_______________________________
(must not be later than 90 days after the
certificate is filed)

5.  Officer Signature (required): /s/  Gary Borglund
                                  Gary Borglund, President


*If any proposed amendment would alter or change any preference or any
relative or other right given to any class or series of outstanding
shares, then the amendment must be approved by the vote, in addition
to the affirmative vote otherwise required, of the holders of shares
representing a majority of the voting power of each class or series
affected by the amendment regardless of limitations or restrictions on
the voting power thereof.

IMPORTANT: Failure to include any of the above information and submit
the proper fees may cause this filing to be rejected.
AMENDED EXHIBIT A-1 TO AMENDED AND RESTATED SERVICE AGREEMENT



 EXHIBIT (10kk) 
  
 EXHIBIT A-1 
  
 WISCONSIN DENTAL GROUP 
 FINANCIAL
TERMS 
  
 1. Service Fee [§7.3(a)]. The quarterly
Service Fee for each calendar quarter in calendar year 2004 shall be the lesser of (a) the Actual Margin for such calendar quarter, or (b) the amount set forth below for such calendar quarter: 
  

									
	 Qtr. 1

	  	 Qtr. 2

	  	 Qtr. 3

	  	 Qtr. 4

	  	 Full Year


	 $1,317,438
	  	$1,417,026	  	$1,585,305	  	$1,591,839	  	$5,911,608

  
 The Service Fee for
each subsequent calendar quarter shall be an amount equal to the lesser of (i) the Actual Margin for such calendar quarter, or (ii) the aggregate amount of the Service Fee and the Performance Fee paid or payable with respect to the corresponding
calendar quarter in the immediately preceding calendar year (after giving effect to any adjustments under §7.4 of this Agreement). Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Agreement, for purposes of applying the immediately preceding
sentence only: (A) the Performance Fee and the related adjustment, if any, under §7.4 shall be calculated each calendar quarter (substituting “calendar quarter” for all references to “calendar year” in §7.3(b) and
§7.4 for that purpose), and (B) the Performance Fee so calculated for any calendar quarter shall be deemed to be the Performance Fee payable for that calendar quarter under the immediately preceding sentence. 
  
 2. Performance Fee Adjustment Percentage. For purposes of the monthly
calculation and accrual of the Performance Fee Adjustment under Section 7.4 of the Service Agreement, Provider acknowledges and agrees that this amendment is being entered into for calendar year 2004 and that the Adjustment Percentage for such
calendar year is 25%. 
  
 3. Adjustments. Any or all of the
percentages or amounts contained in this exhibit may hereafter be changed from time to time by written agreement of the Parties. Such agreement may be in the form of a new Exhibit A-1 to this agreement, which, if signed by both Parties, shall
supersede this exhibit for all purposes thereafter. 
  
 The
effective date of this Exhibit A-1 is January 1, 2004. 
  

							
	 WISCONSIN DENTAL GROUP
	 	 NORTHPARK DENTAL GROUP, LLC*

				
	 By
	  	 /s/    ROBERT W.
TRETTIN        

	 	By	 	 /s/    MICHAEL J.
VAUGHAN        


	 	  	Robert Trettin, D.D.S., President	 	 	 	Michael J. Vaughan, Vice President
				
	 Date
	  	3/18/04	 	 Date
	 	 3/22/04




	*	Successor in interest to American Dental Partners of Wisconsin, LLC (successor in interest to American Dental Partners of Wisconsin, Inc.)
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.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary

                    The following Applications for: Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits were filed under Subpart B (formerly Subpart Q) of the Department of Transportation's Procedural Regulations (See 14 CFR 301.201*et. seq.*). The due date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motions to Modify Scope are set forth below for each application. Following the Answer period DOT may process the application by expedited procedures. Such procedures may consist of the adoption of a show-cause order, a tentative order, or in appropriate cases a final order without further proceedings.                

*Docket Number:*                     DOT-OST-2010-0023.                

*Date Filed:*                     January 25, 2010.                

*Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify Scope:*                     February 16, 2010.                

*Description:*                     Application of Wings Airways, Inc. requesting a certificate of public convenience and necessity to transport passenger, property and mail in interstate air transportation.                

*Docket Number:*                     DOT-OST-2010-0028.                

*Date Filed:*                     January 29, 2010.                

*Due Date for Answers, Conforming Applications, or Motion to Modify Scope:*                     February 19, 2010.                

*Description:*                     Application of Aero Republica S.A. requesting a foreign air carrier permit and corresponding exemption to enable it to engage in daily scheduled nonstop flights between Bogota, Colombia and Miami, Florida.                

Renee V. Wright,

Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.

[FR Doc. 2010-2903 Filed 2-9-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO. 1:02-cr-00029-MP-AK 

 1:06-cr-00041-MP-AK

RAYMOND REED, JR.,

SHEILA GILLINS,

Defendants.

________________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on an in-court conference held on Tuesday, April 10,

2007, for determination of counsel as to Defendants Raymond Reed and Sheila Gillins. At a

change of plea hearing for case number 1:06-cr-00041 held on Thursday, April 5, 2007, each

Defendant dismissed their appointed counsel in both cases, stating that they intended to hire new

counsel. During the determination of counsel hearing, Defendant Reed stated that he was still in

the process of hiring a lawyer, that he was not ready to proceed to trial, and requested a

continuance of his trial, expressly waiving any speedy trial objection. The Government does not

object to the continuance. This request is granted, trial is continued to Tuesday, June 12, 2007,

at 12:30 p.m., and an in-court conference for determination of counsel is scheduled for Friday,

May 4, 2007, at 9:30 a.m.

Also at the conference, Defendant Gillins stated that she has not yet hired a lawyer, and

because she is unprepared for trial, Defendant Gillins also requested a continuance of her trial. 

Defendant waives her right to a speedy trial, and the Government does not object to the

continuance. This request is granted, Defendant Gillins’ trial is continued to Tuesday, June 12,

Case 1:02-cr-00029-MP-GRJ Document 90 Filed 04/10/07 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 1::02-cr-00029-MP-AK 1:06-cr-00041-MP-AK

2007, at 12:30 p.m., and an in-court conference for determination of counsel is scheduled for

Friday, May 4, 2007, at 9:30 a.m.

Additionally, in case number 1:02-cr-00029, both Defendants have entered pleas of

guilty. Therefore, Defendant Reed’s sentencing date is scheduled for Wednesday, June 20,

2007, at 1:30 p.m., and Defendant Gillins’ sentencing date is scheduled for Wednesday, June 20,

2007, at 2:00 p.m. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Defendant Raymond Reed’s trial in case number 1:06-cr-00041 is continued to 

Tuesday, June 12, 2007, at 12:30 p.m., and an in-court conference for 

determination of counsel is scheduled for Friday, May 4, 2007, at 9:30 a.m.

2. Defendant Sheila Gillins’ trial in case number 1:06-cr-00041 is continued to 

Tuesday, June 12, 2007, at 12:30 p.m., and an in-court conference for 

determination of counsel is scheduled for Friday, May 4, 2007, at 9:30 a.m.

3. Defendant Raymond Reed’s sentencing date in case number 1:02-cr-00029 is set 

for Wednesday, June 20, 2007, at 1:30 p.m.

4. Defendant Sheila Gillins’ sentencing date in case number 1:02-cr-00029 is set for 

Wednesday, June 20, 2007, at 2:00 p.m. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 10th day of April, 2007

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:02-cr-00029-MP-GRJ Document 90 Filed 04/10/07 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2212 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2212

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a 3-year recovery 
                      period for all race horses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2013

   Mr. Barr introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a 3-year recovery 
                      period for all race horses.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Race Horse Cost Recovery Act of 
2013''.

SEC. 2. THREE-YEAR DEPRECIATION FOR RACE HORSES.

    (a) In General.--Clause (i) of section 168(e)(3)(A) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
                            ``(i) any race horse,''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to property placed in service after December 31, 2013.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 11


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>



                                   Exhibit 11


Statement Re:  Computation of Earnings Per Share

                                                   December 31      December 31
                                                      1999             1998
                                                      ----              ----
<S>                                                <C>               <C>

Primary Earnings Per Share
     Net Income (Loss)                            $   (532,384)    $   (648,343)
     Weighted average shares outstanding            15,648,467        7,214,807

         Primary Income (Loss) Per Shares                 (.03)    $      (0.09)

Fully Diluted Earnings Per Share
     Net Income (Loss)                            $   (532,384)    $   (648,343)
     Weighted average shares outstanding            15,648,467        7,214,807
     Addition from assumed exercise of                 400,000          253,750
           Common stock purchase warrants
           And options
     Addition from assumed conversion of               299,500          225,000
           Preferred Stock

Weighted average number of Common Share             16,347,967        7,693,557
     Outstanding on a fully diluted basis

Fully Diluted (Loss) Per Share                    $      (0.03)    $      (0.08)

</TABLE>

(a)  This calculation is submitted in accordance with regulation S-K Item 601
     (b)(11) although it is contrary to paragraph 40 of APB Opinion No. 15
     because it produces an anti-dilutive result.