alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
23.406 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.       (a) 						            Insert the provision at 52.223-1, Biobased Product Certification, in solicitations that-                                                         (1) 								                Require the delivery or specify the use of USDA-designated items; or                                                            (2) 								                Include the clause at 52.223-2.                                                                             (b) 						            Insert the clause at 52.223-2,	Affirmative Procurement of Biobased Products Under Service and Construction	Contracts, in service or construction solicitations and contracts, unless	the contract will not involve the use of USDA-designated items at http://www.biopreferred.gov or 7 CFR part 3201.                                          (c) 						            Except for the acquisition of commercially available off-the-shelf items, insert the provision at 52.223-4, Recovered Material Certification, in solicitations that-                                                         (1) 								                Require the delivery or specify the use of EPA-designated items; or                                                            (2) 								                Include the clause at 52.223-17, Affirmative Procurement of EPA-designated Items in Service and Construction Contracts.                                                                             (d) 						            Except for the acquisition of commercially available off-the-shelf items, insert the clause at 52.223-9, Estimate of Percentage of Recovered Material Content for EPA-designated Items, in solicitations and contracts exceeding $150,000 that are for, or specify the use of, EPA-designated items containing recovered materials. If technical personnel advise that estimates can be verified, use the clause with its Alternate I.                                          (e) 						            Insert the clause at 52.223-17, Affirmative Procurement of EPA-designated Items in Service and Construction Contracts, in service or construction solicitations and contracts unless the contract will not involve the use of EPA-designated items.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 23.4 - Use of Recovered Materials and Biobased Products
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Bush Industries, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 28, 2003 (the "Report") I, Paul S.
Bush, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S)
1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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

/s/ Paul S. Bush

Paul S. Bush
Chairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer
August 6, 2003

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company pursuant
to the Exchange Act and does not constitute a part of the Report.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
#### § 51.769 Injury.

*Injury* means any specific defect described in § 51.784, Table I; or an equally objectionable variation of any one of these defects, any other defect, or any combination of defects, which slightly detracts from the appearance, or the edible or marketing quality of the fruit.
#### § 51.1566 Metric conversion table.

| Inches | Millimeters (mm) |
| --- | --- |
| 1/8 equals | 3.2 |
| 1/4 equals | 6.4 |
| 1/2 equals | 12.7 |
| 3/4 equals | 19.1 |
| 1 equals | 25.4 |
| 11/2 equals | 38.1 |
| 2 equals | 50.8 |
| 21/2 equals | 63.5 |
| 3 equals | 76.2 |
| 31/2 equals | 88.9 |
| 4 equals | 101.6 |
| 41/2 equals | 114.3 |

| Ounces | Grams |
| --- | --- |
| 1 equals | 28.35 |
| 4 equals | 113.40 |
| 5 equals | 141.75 |
| 6 equals | 170.10 |
| 7 equals | 198.45 |
| 8 equals | 226.80 |
| 9 equals | 255.15 |
| 10 equals | 283.50 |
| 12 equals | 340.20 |
| 14 equals | 396.90 |
| 16 equals | 453.60 |
| 18 equals | 510.30 |
| 19 equals | 538.60 |
| 20 equals | 567.00 |
###### Editorial Note on Part 4290

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 4290 appear at 85 FR 16522, Mar. 24, 2020.

#### § 4290.3041 Events of default and the Agency's remedies for RBIC's noncompliance with terms of licensure.

In addition to complying with the provisions of § 4290.1810, a RBIC's failure to comply with the terms of this part may result in the Agency revoking the Non-leveraged RBIC's license issued under this part.

[76 FR 80225, Dec. 23, 2011, as amended at 77 FR 4885, Feb. 1, 2012]
25.903 Exempted supplies.

(a) Subchapters VIII and X of Chapter 98 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (19

U.S.C. 1202) list supplies for which exemptions from duty may be obtained when imported into the

customs territory of the United States under a Government contract. For certain of these supplies,

the contracting agency must certify to the Commissioner of Customs that they are for the purpose

stated in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (see 19 CFR 10.102-104, 10.114, and 10.121 and 15 CFR

Part 301 for requirements and formats).

(b) Supplies (excluding equipment) for Government-operated vessels or aircraft may be withdrawn

from any customs-bonded warehouse, from continuous customs custody elsewhere than in a bonded

warehouse, or from a foreign-trade zone, free of duty and internal revenue tax as provided in 19

U.S.C. 1309 and 1317. The contracting activity must cite this authority on the appropriate customs

form when making purchases (see 19 CFR 10.59 - 10.65).

Parent topic: Subpart 25.9 - Customs and Duties
#### § 51.3207 Doubles.

*Doubles* means onions which have developed more than one distinct bulb joined only at the base.
47.208 Report of shipment (REPSHIP).

47.208-1 Advance notice.

47.208-2 Contract clause.

Parent topic: Subpart 47.2 - Contracts for Transportation or for Transportation-Related Services
#### In the Matter of Malcolm G., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

Submitted June 25, 2007;

decided July 2, 2007

Reported below, 38 AD3d 662.

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved.
32.1103 Applicability.

The Government shall provide all contract payments through EFT except if-

(a) The office making payment under a contract that requires payment by EFT, loses the ability to

release payment by EFT. To the extent authorized by 31 CFR Part 208, the payment office shall

make necessary payments pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of the clause at either 52.232-33 or

52.232-34 until such time as it can make EFT payments;

(b) The payment is to be received by or on behalf of the contractor outside the United States and

Puerto Rico (but see 32.1106(b));

(c) A contract is paid in other than United States currency (but see 32.1106(b));

(d) Payment by EFT under a classified contract could compromise the safeguarding of classified

information or national security, or arrangements for appropriate EFT payments would be

impractical due to security considerations;

(e) A contract is awarded by a deployed contracting officer in the course of military operations,

including, but not limited to, contingency operations as defined in 2.101, or a contract is awarded by

any contracting officer in the conduct of emergency operations, such as responses to natural

disasters or national or civil emergencies, if-

(1) EFT is not known to be possible; or

(2) EFT payment would not support the objectives of the operation;

(f) The agency does not expect to make more than one payment to the same recipient within a oneyear period;

(g) An agency’s need for supplies and services is of such unusual and compelling urgency that the

Government would be seriously injured unless payment is made by a method other than EFT;

(h) There is only one source for supplies and services and the Government would be seriously

injured unless payment is made by a method other than EFT; or

(i) Otherwise authorized by Department of the Treasury Regulations at 31 CFR Part 208.

Parent topic: Subpart 32.11 - Electronic Funds Transfer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

LLOYD GOODNOW,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20cv267-MW/GRJ

THIRD CONGRESSIONAL

DISTRICT OF FLORIDA,

Defendant.

______________________________/

ORDER REJECTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Court has considered, without hearing, the Magistrate Judge’s Report 

and Recommendation, ECF No. 10, and has also reviewed de novo Plaintiff’s 

objections to the Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 11. While Plaintiff has 

failed to comply with the Magistrate Judge’s orders regarding service of process,

ECF Nos. 8 & 9, Plaintiff is a pro se litigant who has made some effort to effectuate 

service on Defendant. However, Plaintiff’s efforts at this juncture are insufficient. 

Plaintiff has one more opportunity to properly serve Defendant with process and 

must do so in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i) or risk dismissal 

pursuant to Rule 4(m). Accordingly,

Case 1:20-cv-00267-MW-GRJ Document 12 Filed 03/23/21 Page 1 of 2
2

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation, ECF No. 10, is rejected. Plaintiff shall have 

until April 22, 2021 to properly serve Defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure. 4(i) and file proof of service with this Court. If Plaintiff fails to do both 

of these things by April 22, 2021, this case shall be dismissed without prejudice 

pursuant to Rule 4(m). This case is remanded to the Magistrate Judge for further 

consideration.

SO ORDERED on March 23, 2021.

s/Mark E. Walker 

Chief United States District Judge

Case 1:20-cv-00267-MW-GRJ Document 12 Filed 03/23/21 Page 2 of 2
Case 5:02-cv-00343-MP Document 10 Filed 01/07/03 Page 1 of 2
Case 5:02-cv-00343-MP Document 10 Filed 01/07/03 Page 2 of 2
§ 4285.25 Authorized use of cooperative agreement funds. Funds received for research under cooperative agreements in this program shall only be used for: ( a ) Payment of salaries and necessary employee benefits of personnel as agreed upon in the Cooperative Agreement. Included are salaries and benefits of State employees assigned full-time to one or more projects, or the percent of the salaries and benefits related to project work for State employees assigned part-time to research on one or more projects. Salaries and benefits include basic salary, other compensation such as holiday pay, sick or annual leave, and personnel benefits (quarters allowance, payments to other funds such as employees' life insurance, health benefits, retirement, Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA), accident compensation, and similar payments). For any of the benefit items when the State usually pays the employer share, Federal funds may be used to pay the proportionate share of such employer contributions.
( b ) Payment of necessary and reasonable office expenses such as office rental, office utilities, and office equipment rental. The purchase of office equipment is permissible when the cooperator determines it to be more economical than renting. However, as a general rule, these types of expenses would be classified as indirect costs in multiple funded organizations and would not be an allowable expense. Planned purchases of equipment costing more than $200 per unit must be approved by RDA or its successor agency. Equipment purchased becomes State property pursuant to the cooperative agreement.
( c ) Payment of necessary and reasonable costs of printing publications of research project results. However, all such publications should show the RDA or its successor agency as cooperator in the project and bear the following statement: “State funds for this project (publication) were matched with Federal funds under the Federal-State Research on Cooperatives Program of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Development Administration or its successor agency, Cooperative Services, as provided by the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 and (appropriate) fiscal year appropriations.”
( d ) Purchase of office supplies (such as paper, pens, pencils, and trade magazines) and postage needed for project activities.
( e ) Payment of necessary and reasonable travel expenses.
36.518 Work oversight in costreimbursement construction contracts.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.236-18, Work Oversight in Cost-Reimbursement

Construction Contracts, in solicitations and contracts when a cost-reimbursement construction

contract is contemplated.

Parent topic: Subpart 36.5 - Contract Clauses
#### NYCTL 1998-2 Trust et al., Respondents, v Zoila Lucinda Avila, Appellant, et al., Defendants. RSL Holdings, LLC, Nonparty Respondent.

[815 NYS2d 725]

*966In an action to foreclose tax liens, the defendant Zoila Lucinda Avila appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Steinhardt, J.), dated January 10, 2005, which, inter alia, denied those branches of her motion which were (1) to restore a temporary restraining order contained in an order of the same court dated November 26, 2002, prohibiting the foreclosure and sale of certain real property pending the hearing of her motion for a prehminary injunction prohibiting the foreclosure and sale pendente lite, (2) to restore to the motion calendar her motion for a preliminary injunction prohibiting the foreclosure and sale, (3) pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) (4) to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the same court entered July 15, 2002, upon her default in appearing or answering, and (4) to nullify a referee’s deed to the real property dated March 1, 2004, issued to nonparty, RSL Holdings, LLC.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the motion of the defendant Zoila Lucinda Avila (hereinafter the appellant) which was, in effect, to vacate her default in answering the complaint, and to set aside the foreclosure sale that followed therefrom. Since the appellant had neither a justifiable excuse for her default nor a meritorious defense to the action, her motion to vacate the default was properly denied *(see Bank of New York v Lagakos,*27 AD3d 678 [2006]).

Notice of the adjourned foreclosure sale date was properly published *(see*RPAPL 231 [3]; *Frank Buttermark Plumbing & Heating Corp. v Sagarese,*119 AD2d 540 [1986]; *Guardian Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v Horse-Hawk Holding Corp.,*72 AD2d 737 [1979]), and any alleged deficiency in notice to the appellant’s attorney is immaterial in any event since the appellant appeared at the sale *(see Arch Assets v AL & LP Realty Co.,*227 AD2d 295 [1996]) and has failed to demonstrate any prejudice to a substantial right as a result of the alleged deficiency in notice *(see Amresco New England II v Denino,*283 AD2d 599, 599-600 [2001]; *Long Is. Sav. Bank of Centereach v Jean Valiquette, M.D., P.C.,*183 AD2d 877 [1992]).

*967The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Schmidt, J.P., Krausman, Spolzino and Fisher, JJ., concur.
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

RHONDA FLEMING,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:20cv545–WS/MJF

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

and WARDEN ERICA STRONG,

Defendants.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF

No. 114) docketed August 15, 2022. The magistrate judge recommends that the

plaintiff’s emergency motion for a preliminary injunction and hearing (ECF No.

83) be denied. Plaintiff has filed no objections to the report and recommendation.

Upon review of the record, this court has determined that the report and

recommendation should be adopted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 114) is

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order of the court.

Case 4:20-cv-00545-WS-MJF Document 136 Filed 09/13/22 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

2. The plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction (ECF No. 83) is

DENIED.

3. The clerk shall refer the case to the magistrate judge for further

proceedings.

DONE AND ORDERED this 13th day of September , 2022.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00545-WS-MJF Document 136 Filed 09/13/22 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICER REGARDING PERIODIC REPORT CONTAINING 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS



I, Steven A. Schumm, the Chief Administrative Officer of Enstar Income Program II-2, L.P. (the "Partnership") in compliance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that, the Partnership's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2004 (the "Report") filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission:

- fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
- the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

/s/  Steven A. SchummSteven A. SchummChief Administrative OfficerMay 17, 2004
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Ksenia Pavlova, D.O., as Assignee of Lalputan, Sheldon, Appellant, <br><br>against<br><br>Travelers Insurance Company, Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>The Rybak Firm, PLLC (Damin J. Toell of counsel), for appellant.Law Office of Aloy O. Ibuzor (Tricia Prettypaul of counsel), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Harriet L. Thompson, J.), entered November 20, 2015. The order granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.</p><p>ORDERED that the order is modified by providing that defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs.</p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Civil Court which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the action was premature because plaintiff had failed to provide requested verification, and denied plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment.</p><p>Contrary to plaintiff's contentions, defendant's proof was sufficient to demonstrate prima facie that it had properly mailed the verification requests at issue (<a href="../2008/2008_04072.htm" target="_blank"><i>see St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co.</i>, 50 AD3d 1123</a> [2008]) and that it had not received the requested verification, and, thus, that the action is premature (<a href="../2005/2005_09484.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Central Suffolk Hosp. v New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.</i>, 24 AD3d 492</a> [2005]). However, as plaintiff further argues, the affidavit submitted by plaintiff in support of its cross motion was sufficient to give rise to a presumption that the requested verification had been mailed to, and received by, defendant (<i>see <font color="FF0000">[*2]</font>St. Vincent's Hosp. of Richmond</i>, 50 AD3d 1123). In light of the foregoing, there is a triable issue of fact as to whether the action is premature (<a href="../2015/2015_51776.htm" target="_blank"><i>see Compas Med., P.C. v Praetorian Ins. Co.</i>, 49 Misc 3d 152</a>[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 51776[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2015]).</p><br>Accordingly, the order is modified by providing that defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.<p>PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur. </p><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: June 01, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
36.522 Preconstruction conference.

If the contracting officer determines it may be desirable to hold a preconstruction conference, the

contracting officer shall insert a clause substantially the same as the clause at 52.236-26,

Preconstruction Conference, in solicitations and fixed price contracts for construction or for

dismantling, demolition or removal of improvements.

Parent topic: Subpart 36.5 - Contract Clauses
22.1403 Waivers.       (a) 						            The Director of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs of the U.S. Department of Labor (Director of OFCCP), may waive the application of any or all of the terms of the clause at 52.222-36, Equal Opportunity for Workers with Disabilities, for-                                                         (1) 								                Any contract if a waiver is deemed to be in the national interest; or                                                            (2) 								                Groups or categories of contracts if a waiver is in the national interest and it is-                                                                           (i) 										                    Impracticable to act on each request individually; and                                                                              (ii) 										                    Determined that the waiver will substantially contribute to convenience in administering the Act.                                                                                                                            (b) 						            The head of an agency may waive any requirement in this subpart when it is determined that the contract is essential to the national security, and that its award without complying with such requirements is necessary to the national security. Upon making such a determination, the head of the agency shall notify the Director of OFCCP in writing within 30 days.                                          (c) 						            The contracting officer shall submit requests for waivers in accordance with agency procedures.                                          (d) 						            A waiver granted for a particular class of contracts may be withdrawn for any contract within that class whenever considered necessary by the Director of OFCCP to achieve the purposes of the Act. The withdrawal shall not apply to contracts awarded before the withdrawal. The withdrawal shall not apply to solicitations under any means of sealed bidding unless it is made more than 10 days before the date set for bid opening.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 22.14 - Employment of Workers with Disabilities
# Subpart 41.6 - Forms

**Parent topic:**Part 41 - Acquisition of Utility Services

## 41.601 Utility services forms.

(a) 						            If acquiring utility services under other than an areawide contract, a *purchase order* or an interagency agreement, the Standard Form (SF) 33, *Solicitation*, *Offer* and Award; SF 26, Award/Contract; or SF 1447, *Solicitation*/Contract, *shall* be used.

(b) 						            The *contracting officer**shall* incorporate the applicable rate schedule in each contract, *purchase order* or modification.