alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
47.000 Scope of part.       (a) 						            This part prescribes policies and procedures for-                                                         (1) 								                Applying transportation and traffic management considerations in the acquisition of supplies; and                                                            (2) 								                Acquiring transportation or transportation-related services by contract methods other than bills of lading, transportation requests, transportation warrants, and similar transportation forms. Transportation and transportation services can be obtained by acquisition subject to the FAR or by acquisition under 49 U.S.C. 10721 or 49 U.S.C. 13712. Even though the FAR does not regulate the acquisition of transportation or transportation-related services when the bill of lading is the contract, this contract method is widely used and, therefore, relevant guidance on the use of the bill of lading is provided in this part (see 47.104).                                                                             (b) 						            The definitions in this part have been condensed from statutory definitions. In case of inconsistency between the language of this part and the statutory requirements, the statute shall prevail.    **Parent topic:** Part 47 - Transportation
###### Editorial Note on Part 4290

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 4290.690 Examinations.

All RBICs must submit to annual examinations by or at the direction of the Agency for the purpose of evaluating regulatory compliance.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Aaron Levie, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Box, Inc. for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2015 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form
10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Box, Inc.



|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                   
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ------------------
|Date: March 30, 2015 |  |  |  |    
|                     |  |  | 
|                     |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    Aaron Levie

| |  |  |  |        |  |                        
| |  |  |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
| |  |  |  | Name:  |  | Aaron Levie            
| |  |  |  | Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer

I, Dylan Smith, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Box, Inc. for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2015 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Box, Inc.



|                     |  |  |  |     |  |                   
|-------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ------------------
|Date: March 30, 2015 |  |  |  |    
|                     |  |  | 
|                     |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    Dylan Smith

| |  |  |  |        |  |                        
| |  |  |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
| |  |  |  | Name:  |  | Dylan Smith            
| |  |  |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
#### § 51.3208 Bottlenecks.

*Bottlenecks* means onions which have abnormally thick necks with only fairly well developed bulbs.
Exhibit 32

NEWSTAR FINANCIAL, INC.

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 annual report on Form 10-K of NewStar Financial, Inc. (the Company) for the
year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



|(1) | The Report 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |                                                
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------------
|                     |  |  |  | NEWSTAR FINANCIAL, INC.                        
|                     |  | 
|Date: March 10, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/    TIMOTHY J. CONWAY                       
|                     |  |  |  | Timothy J. Conway                              
|                     |  |  |  | Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President
|                     |  | 
|Date: March 10, 2009 |  |  |  | /s/    JOHN K. BRAY                            
|                     |  |  |  | John K. Bray                                   
|                     |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0197

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

RICHARD DENVER HINMAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until January 13, 2022, to 

prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief.

No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 13 2021

12/13/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0197
42.1504 Contract clause.

Insert the clause at 52.242-5, Payments to Small Business Subcontractors, in all solicitations and

contracts containing the clause at 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

Parent topic: Subpart 42.15 - Contractor Performance Information
Federal Acquisition Regulation

Part 34 - Major System Acquisition

Part 35 - Research and Development Contracting

Part 36 - Construction and Architect-Engineer Contracts

Part 37 - Service Contracting

Part 38 - Federal Supply Schedule Contracting

Part 39 - Acquisition of Information Technology

Part 40 - Reserved

Part 41 - Acquisition of Utility Services

Parent topic: Subchapter F - Special Categories of Contracting
Fourth Department,

January, 1980

(January 11, 1980)

#### Robert Anderson, Individually and as Administrator of the Estates *1031of Judy Anderson and Others, Deceased, et al., Appellants, v Donald A. Rowe, Respondent. (And Another Action.)

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: The motion for summary judgment dismissing the claims for conscious pain and suffering brought by the administrator of the estates of Janet Anderson and Judy Anderson was properly granted. All of the evidence shows that these girls were killed instantly upon impact. The plaintiff was not able to present any evidence that they suffered any conscious pain. Nor was the plaintiff able to show evidence from which one might imply that the decedents were aware of the danger and suffered from preimpact terror. Summary judgment was properly granted in the second action because it was not timely brought. Special Term did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint (CPLR 3025, subd [b]). (Appeal from order of Livingston Supreme Court—dismiss causes of action.) Present—Cardamone, J. P., Hancock, Jr., Schnepp, Callahan and Moule, JJ.
#### § 51.2649 Application of tolerances.

Individual samples shall have not more than double the tolerances specified, except that at least two defective and two off-size specimens may be permitted in any sample: *Provided,* That the averages for the entire lot are within the tolerances specified for the grade.
#### §§ 4280.412-4280.414 [Reserved]
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-07-00584-CR

Tresa Denise Byrd, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 167TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. D-1-DC-06-302760, HONORABLE MICHAEL LYNCH, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Tresa Byrd seeks to appeal an order revoking community supervision. The court has

certified that this is a plea-bargain case and Byrd has no right of appeal.

If a defendant plea bargains for community supervision, rule 25.2(a)(2) restricts the

right of appeal from the conviction, but it does not restrict the defendant’s right of appeal following

a subsequent revocation of supervision. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2); Feagin v. State, 967 S.W.2d

417, 419 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). This is true even if the defendant pleaded “true” to the allegations

in the motion to revoke, because rule 25.2(a)(2) refers only to plea bargains with regard to pleas of

guilty and no contest. Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610, 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also

Gutierrez v. State, 108 S.W.3d 304-309-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (holding that plea bargain

recommendation is not binding on trial court at revocation hearing). We cannot determine from the

documents forwarded to the Court with the notice of appeal whether the plea bargain referred to in
2

the trial court’s certification was at the original trial or at the revocation hearing, but in either event,

it does not restrict Byrd’s right of appeal from the revocation order.

The appeal is abated. The trial court is instructed to prepare and file an amended

certification. Dears, 154 S.W.3d at 614. Unless Byrd waived her right of appeal, this certification

should state that this is not a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has the right of appeal. If

necessary, the court shall appoint counsel and order the preparation of a free appellate record. A

copy of the amended certification and of the order appointing counsel, if made, shall be forwarded

to the Clerk of this Court no later than fifteen days from the date of this opinion.

__________________________________________

David Puryear, Justice

Before Justices Patterson, Puryear and Pemberton

Abated

Filed: November 15, 2007

Do Not Publish
#### Robert A. Orange, Plaintiff, v. Swiftways Supermarkets, Inc., Appellant, and Philip Fitzel et al., Respondents. (Action No. 1.) Swiftways Supermarkets, Inc., Appellant, v. Eddy Provisions Co., Inc., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. (Action No. 2.)

Order entered on or about January 8, 1969, denying motion for a joint trial, unanimously affirmed, with $30 costs and disbursements to respondents, without prejudice to an application for consecutive trials before the same Trial Justice. Action No. 2 is for a declaratory judgment relating to insurance coverage in respect to the occurrence underlying Action No. 1. A joint trial could possibly prejudice defendants in Action No. 1, which is triable before a jury. Concur—MeGivern, J. P., Markewich, McNally and Bastow, JJ.
32.006-1 General.

(a) Under 10 U.S.C. 3806(j), the statutory authority implemented by this section is available to the

Department of Defense and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; this statutory

authority is not available to the United States Coast Guard. Under 41 U.S.C. 4506, this statutory

authority is available to all agencies subject to Division C of subtitle I of title 41.

(b) 10 U.S.C. 3806(c) and 41 U.S.C. 4506 provide for a reduction or suspension of further payments

to a contractor when the agency head determines there is substantial evidence that the contractor's

request for advance, partial, or progress payments is based on fraud. This authority does not apply

to commercial interim payments under subpart 32.2, or performance-based payments under

subpart 32.10.

(c) The agency head may not delegate his or her responsibilities under these statutes below Level IV

of the Executive Schedule.

(d) Authority to reduce or suspend payments under these statutes is in addition to other Government

rights, remedies, and procedures.

(e) In accordance with these statutes, agency head determinations and decisions under this section

may be made for an individual contract or any group of contracts affected by the fraud.

Parent topic: 32.006 Reduction or suspension of contract payments upon finding of fraud.
Comprehensive Credit
Facility Agreement of Maximum Amount (“Credit Facility
Agreement”)
Entered into by and between Shenzhen BAK Battery Co., Ltd (“the Debtor”) and Shenzhen Nanshan Branch, China Everbright
Bank (the
“Creditor”) Dated January 21st, 2009

    


    Main
articles:

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Contract
      number: ZH78240901003;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Maximum
      amount of credit facilities to be provided: RMB 100
    million;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Term:
      from March 30th,
      2009 to March 30th,
      2010;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Purpose
      of the loan is to provide working capital for the
      Company;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Interest
      rate will be determined in each loan agreement to be signed under this
      Credit Facility Agreement;

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Breach
      of contract penalties: correct the breach of contract in time limit;
      suspension of loan unprovided; demand prepayment of loan principal
      and interest before maturity; adjustment of the maximum amount of
      credit facilities.

            


    

    


    Headlines
of the articles omitted

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Identification
      of terms

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Terms
      of credit

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              The
      procedure on using the comprehensive credit
  facility

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Guaranty

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              The
      promise of the Creditor

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              The
      promise of the Debtor

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Validity

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Disputation
      settlement

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              The
      integrity of Credit Facility
Agreement

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Supplement
      articles

            


    

    
      	
              Ø

            	
              Notification
Case 5:98-cr-00028-RH-GRJ Document 235 Filed 09/18/17 Page 1 of 3
Case 5:98-cr-00028-RH-GRJ Document 235 Filed 09/18/17 Page 2 of 3
Case 5:98-cr-00028-RH-GRJ Document 235 Filed 09/18/17 Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information from the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheet and Condensed Consolidated Statement of Income
filed as part of Form 10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-02-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-04-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-03-1998
<CASH>                                          30,174
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  543,511
<ALLOWANCES>                                    24,071
<INVENTORY>                                    369,015
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,018,345
<PP&E>                                       1,740,141
<DEPRECIATION>                                 874,268
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,765,666
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          943,568
<BONDS>                                      1,730,487
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           658
<OTHER-SE>                                   (126,603)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,765,666
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,817,200
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,381,802
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               146,732
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,538
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              82,380
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                143,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                    57,096
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             85,904
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (4,474)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    81,430
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .67 <F1><F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .63 <F1><F2>
<FN>
<F1> 
Earnings per share have been prepared in accordance with SFAS No. 128,
"Earnings Per Share" and therefore basic and diluted earnings per share have 
been entered in place of primary and fully diluted EPS, respectively.
<F2>
Earnings Per Share amounts reflect a three-for-one stock split declared on
August 11, 1998 and effective September 1, 1998. Prior financial data schedules
have not been restated
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 1:92-cr-01048-MP

YOLANDA ESCOBAR,

Defendant.

___________________________/

O R D E R 

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 118, Motion to Dismiss by United States as to

Yolanda Escobar. The Drug Enforcement Administration advises that there is insufficient

evidence to positively identify the defendant and if she were to be apprehended, there is

insufficient evidence, due to the age of the case and unavailability of witnesses, to proceed to

trial. Based upon DEA’s representations, Government counsel has concluded that there is no

reasonable likelihood of a successful prosecution on the merits, and requests that the charges

against this defendant be dismissed. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

The indictment against Yolanda Escobar is dismissed.

DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of November, 2008

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 1:92-cr-01048-MP Document 119 Filed 11/25/08 Page 1 of 1
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ronald R. Campbell, Appellant.

[813 NYS2d 831]

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Columbia County (Czajka, J.), rendered March 2, 2005, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree.

Defendant waived indictment and agreed to be prosecuted by a superior court information charging him with criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree. He pleaded guilty to this charge and waived his right to appeal. The prosecution and defense made a joint recommendation that defendant, who had a prior felony, should be sentenced to IV2 to 3 years in prison. Defendant was sentenced in accordance with the joint recommendation and he now appeals.

Initially, insofar as defendant did not move to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction, he has failed to *1084preserve his claim that his plea—and accompanying waiver— were not knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered *(see People v Bonet,*15 AD3d 730, 730 [2005], *lv denied*4 NY3d 851 [2005]; *People v Schiffer,*13 AD3d 719, 720 [2004]). Nothing in the record casts significant doubt on defendant’s guilt so as to present an exception to the preservation requirement *(see People v Lopez,*71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]). In any event, even if we were to consider defendant’s claim, we would find it to be without merit as the record provides no basis to substantiate his assertion that he was somehow coerced into pleading guilty. Having concluded that defendant’s plea and waiver of appeal were knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently entered, we decline to address his challenge to the severity of the sentence *(see People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 255-256 [2006]; *People v Clow,*10 AD3d 803, 804 [2004]).

Cardona, P.J., Spain, Mugglin, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
#### § 4284.930 Preliminary review.

The Agency encourages Applicants to contact their State Office well in advance of the application submission deadline, to ask questions and to discuss Applicant and Project eligibility potential. At its option, the Agency may establish a preliminary review deadline in accordance with § 4284.915, so that it may informally assess the eligibility of the application and its completeness. The result of the preliminary review is not binding on the Agency.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2324 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2324

      To suspend temporarily the duty on certain audio headphones.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 17, 2006

Mr. Kerry (for himself and Mr. Kennedy) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To suspend temporarily the duty on certain audio headphones.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN AUDIO HEADPHONES.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.85.19      Audio headphones    Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         with an                                                            31/2009
                         acoustically
                         resistive opening
                         and a port, in
                         parallel, that
                         connect walls
                         separating an
                         interior of the
                         enclosure from an
                         exterior of the
                         enclosure outside
                         the earcup
                         (provided for in
                         subheading
                         8518.30.20)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
42.709 Penalties for Unallowable Costs.

42.709-1 Scope.

42.709-2 General.

42.709-3 Responsibilities.

42.709-4 Assessing the penalty.

42.709-5 Computing Interest.

42.709-6 Waiver of the penalty.

42.709-7 Contract clause.

Parent topic: Subpart 42.7 - Indirect Cost Rates