alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 51.2960 Damage. *Damage* means any specific defect mentioned in this section; or any equally objectionable variation of any one of these defects, any other defect, or any combination of defects which materially detracts from the appearance or the edible or shipping quality of the individual walnut or the lot as a whole. The following specific defects shall be considered as damage: ( a ) Broken shells when the area from which a portion of the shell is missing is greater than the area of a circle one-fourth inch in diameter; or when the two halves of the shell have become completely broken apart and separated from each other;
( b ) Perforated shells when the area affected aggregates more than that of a circle one-fourth inch in diameter. The term “perforated shells” means imperfectly developed areas on the shell resembling abrasions and usually including small holes penetrating the shell wall;
( c ) Adhering hulls when affecting more than 5 percent of the shell surface;
( d ) Discoloration (or stain) which covers, in the aggregate, one-fifth or more of the surface of the shell of an individual nut, and which is brown, reddish brown, gray, or other color in pronounced contrast with the color of the rest of the shell or the majority of shells in the lot, or darker discoloration covering a smaller area if the appearance is equally objectionable;
( e ) Mold when attached to the kernel and conspicuous; or when inconspicuous white or gray mold affects an aggregate area larger than one square centimeter or one-eighth of the entire surface of the kernel, whichever is the lesser area;
( f ) Shriveling when more than 5 percent of the surface of the kernel, including both halves, is severely shriveled, or a greater area is affected by lesser degrees of shriveling producing an equally objectionable appearance. Kernels which are thin in cross section but which are otherwise normally developed shall not be considered as damaged; and,
( g ) Insects when an insect or insect fragment, web or frass is present inside the shell, or the kernel shows distinct evidence of insect feeding.
52.243-3 Changes-Time-and-Materials or

Labor-Hours.

As prescribed in 43.205(c), insert the following clause:

Changes-Time-and-Materials or Labor-Hours (Sept 2000)

(a) The Contracting Officer may at any time, by written order, and without notice to the sureties, if

any, make changes within the general scope of this contract in any one or more of the following:

(1) Description of services to be performed.

(2) Time of performance (i.e., hours of the day, days of the week, etc.).

(3) Place of performance of the services.

(4) Drawings, designs, or specifications when the supplies to be furnished are to be specially

manufactured for the Government in accordance with the drawings, designs, or specifications.

(5) Method of shipment or packing of supplies.

(6) Place of delivery.

(7) Amount of Government-furnished property.

(b) If any change causes an increase or decrease in any hourly rate, the ceiling price, or the time

required for performance of any part of the work under this contract, whether or not changed by the

order, or otherwise affects any other terms and conditions of this contract, the Contracting Officer

will make an equitable adjustment in any one or more of the following and will modify the contract

accordingly:

(1) Ceiling price.

(2) Hourly rates.

(3) Delivery schedule.

(4) Other affected terms.

(c) The Contractor shall assert its right to an adjustment under this clause within 30 days from the

date of receipt of the written order. However, if the Contracting Officer decides that the facts justify

it, the Contracting Officer may receive and act upon a proposal submitted before final payment of

the contract.

(d) Failure to agree to any adjustment will be a dispute under the Disputes clause. However, nothing

in this clause excuses the Contractor from proceeding with the contract as changed.

(End of clause)

Parent topic: 52.243 [Reserved]
EXHIBIT 32.2



SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



I, Joseph S. Tibbetts, Jr., Chief Financial Officer of Novell, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company),
hereby certify that, to my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Companys periodic report on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2005 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



* * *



|                           
|---------------------------
|CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER    
|                           
|/s/ JOSEPH S. TIBBETTS, JR.
|Joseph S. Tibbetts, Jr.    
|                           
|Date: September 8, 2005
#### § 636.19 Access to operating unit.

As a condition of program participation, any authorized NRCS representative will have the right to enter an agricultural operation or tract for the purposes of determining eligibility and for ascertaining the accuracy of any representations related to cost-share agreements and performance. Access will include the right to provide technical assistance; determine eligibility; inspect any work undertaken under the cost-share agreements, including the WHIP plan of operations and O&M agreement; and collect information necessary to evaluate the habitat development performance specified in the cost-share agreements. The NRCS representative will make a reasonable effort to contact the participant prior to the exercising of this provision.
# C_2014222EN.01001202.xml

| 12.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/12

---

Corrigendum to Decision of the Director of Europol of 18 April 2014 Implementing the Decision of the Europol Management Board of 16 November 1999 agreeing to the conditions and procedures laid down by Europol regarding taxes applicable to salaries and emoluments paid to Europol staff members for the benefit of Europol

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 211 of 5 July 2014
  )

Official Journal of the European Union C 211 of 5 July 2014

2014/C 222/11

On page 13, footnote 6 should read as follows:

‘Notice on the adjustment of basic salaries and allowances applicable to Europol staff subject to the Europol Staff Regulations pursuant to Article 57(5) of the Council Decision with effect from 1 July 2009 and 1 July 2010 (see page 15 of this Official Journal).’

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIA DE JESUS CORTEZ CANALES,

Petitioner,
v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent. No. 10-72783 Agency No. A094-374-872
ORDER *

O n Petition f

or Review of

an Order of

the Board of Im m igration Appeals Argued and Subm itted May 7, 2013 S ubm ission W ithdrawn June 23, 2015 Resubm itted January

6, 2017 Pasadena, Calif

ornia Bef ore: PREGERSON and FISHER, Circuit Judges, and GW IN, * * District Judge. This case is ordered resubm itted January 6, 2017. The parties’ joint m otion f o r voluntary

dism i ssal (Dkt. 55), f

iled Decem

b er 19, 2016, is GRANTED . The petition is dism issed with prejudice. Each party shall bear its 

# FIL ED JAN 10 2017 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate f or publication and is not precedent except as provided by

Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

* * T he Honorable Jam es S. Gwin, United States District Judge f or the Northern District of

Ohio, sitting by

designation.own f

ees and costs. This order constitutes the m andate of this court, and the m andate shall issue f

orthwith.

2
52.236-26 Preconstruction Conference.       As prescribed in 36.522, insert the following clause:          Preconstruction Conference (Feb 1995)          If the Contracting Officer decides to conduct a preconstruction conference, the successful offeror will be notified and will be required to attend. The Contracting Officer’s notification will include specific details regarding the date, time, and location of the conference, any need for attendance by subcontractors, and information regarding the items to be discussed.          (End of clause)    **Parent topic:** 52.236 [Reserved]
§ 760.906 Eligible livestock. ( a ) To be considered eligible livestock for livestock owners, livestock must be adult or non-adult dairy cattle, beef cattle, buffalo, beefalo, catfish, crawfish, equine, sheep, goats, swine, poultry, deer, or reindeer and meet all the conditions in paragraph (c) of this section.
( b ) To be considered eligible livestock for contract growers, livestock must be poultry or swine as defined in § 760.903 and meet all the conditions in paragraph (c) of this section.
( c ) To be considered eligible, livestock must meet all of the following conditions: ( 1 ) Died in an eligible county as a direct result of an eligible disaster event; ( i ) After January 1, 2005, but before February 28, 2007;
( ii ) No later than 60 calendar days from the ending date of the applicable disaster period, but before February 28, 2007; and
( iii ) In the calendar year for which benefits are being requested.
( 2 ) The disaster event that caused the loss must be the same event for which a natural disaster was declared or designated.
( 3 ) Been maintained for commercial use as part of a farming operation on the day they died; and
( 4 ) Before dying, not have been produced or maintained for reasons other than commercial use as part of a farming operation, including, but not limited to, wild free roaming animals or animals used for recreational purposes, such as pleasure, hunting, roping, pets, or for show.
( d ) In those counties in § 760.902, the following types of animals owned by a livestock owner are eligible livestock: ( 1 ) Adult beef bulls;
( 2 ) Adult beef cows;
( 3 ) Adult buffalo or beefalo bulls;
( 4 ) Adult buffalo or beefalo cows;
( 5 ) Adult dairy bulls;
( 6 ) Adult dairy cows;
( 7 ) Catfish;
( 8 ) Chickens, broilers, pullets;
( 9 ) Chickens, chicks;
( 10 ) Chickens, layers, roasters;
( 11 ) Crawfish;
( 12 ) Deer;
( 13 ) Ducks;
( 14 ) Ducks, ducklings;
( 15 ) Equine;
( 16 ) Geese, goose;
( 17 ) Geese, gosling;
( 18 ) Goats, bucks;
( 19 ) Goats, does;
( 20 ) Goats, kids;
( 21 ) Non-adult beef cattle;
( 22 ) Non-adult buffalo/beefalo;
( 23 ) Non-adult dairy cattle;
( 24 ) Reindeer
( 25 ) Sheep, ewes;
( 26 ) Sheep, lambs;
( 27 ) Sheep, rams;
( 28 ) Swine, feeder pigs under 50 pounds;
( 29 ) Swine, sows, boars, barrows, gilts 50 to 150 pounds;
( 30 ) Swine, sows, boars, barrows, gilts over 150 pounds;
( 31 ) Turkeys, poults; and
( 32 ) Turkeys, toms, fryers, and roasters.
( e ) In those counties in § 760.902, the following types of animals are eligible livestock for contract growers: ( 1 ) Chickens, broilers, pullets;
( 2 ) Chickens, layers, roasters;
( 3 ) Geese, goose;
( 4 ) Swine, boars, sows;
( 5 ) Swine, feeder pigs;
( 6 ) Swine, lightweight barrows, gilts;
( 7 ) Swine, sows, boars, barrows, gilts; and
( 8 ) Turkeys, toms, fryers, and roasters.
#### § 58.14 Authority of applicant.

Proof of the authority of any person applying for any inspection or grading service may be required in the discretion of the Administrator.
52.222-56 Certification Regarding Trafficking in Persons Compliance Plan.       As prescribed in 22.1705(b), insert the following provision:          Certification Regarding Trafficking in Persons Compliance Plan (Oct 2020)                                       (a) 						             The term "commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) item," is defined in the clause of this solicitation entitled "Combating Trafficking in Persons" (FAR clause 52.222-50).                                          (b) 						             The apparent successful Offeror shall submit, prior to award, a certification, as specified in paragraph (c) of this provision, for the portion (if any) of the contract that-                                                         (1) 								                 Is for supplies, other than commercially available off-the-shelf items, to be acquired outside the United States, or services to be performed outside the United States; and                                                            (2) 								                 Has an estimated value that exceeds  									$550,000.                                                                             (c) 						             The certification shall state that-                                                         (1) 								                 It has implemented a compliance plan to prevent any prohibited activities identified in paragraph (b) of the clause at 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons, and to monitor, detect, and terminate the contract with a subcontractor engaging in prohibited activities identified at paragraph (b) of the clause at 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons; and                                                            (2) 								                 After having conducted due diligence, either-                                                                           (i) 										                     To the best of the Offeror’s knowledge and belief, neither it nor any of its proposed agents, subcontractors, or their agents is engaged in any such activities; or                                                                              (ii) 										                     If abuses relating to any of the prohibited activities identified in 52.222-50(b) have been found, the Offeror or proposed subcontractor has taken the appropriate remedial and referral actions.                                                                                                                   (End of provision)    **Parent topic:** 52.222 [Reserved]
§ 59.203 Mandatory daily reporting for sows and boars. ( a ) *Prior day report.* The corporate officers or officially designated representatives of each packer of sows and boars shall report to the Secretary for each business day of the packer not later than 7 a.m. central time on each reporting day information regarding all sows and boars purchased or priced, excluding inferior swine, during the prior business day of the packer all purchase data, reported by lot, including: ( 1 ) The total number of sows and boars purchased divided into at least three weight groups as specified by the Secretary;
( 2 ) The average price paid by each purchase type for all sows in each weight class specified by the Secretary; and
( 3 ) The average price paid by each purchase type for all boars in each weight class specified by the Secretary.
( 4 ) The packer is required to report only the volume of sows and boars that qualify as packer owned swine and shall omit packer owned sows and boars from all average price calculations.
( b ) *Publication.* The Secretary shall publish the information obtained in paragraph (a) of this section as soon as practicable, but not later than 8 a.m. central time, on the reporting day on which the information is received from the packer.
#### Holmes Ambulance Service Corp., Respondent, v Jack Woods et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

“Intermediate judgment”, Supreme Court, New York County, entered June 9, 1980, on grant of plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, is unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of reversing and vacating said judgment *in toto*as against defendants-appellants Woods and Taylor, and the judgment is otherwise affirmed, without costs. Although the papers leave much to be desired, there are triable issues of fact (a) as to whether the contract was altered as to the term of the restrictive covenant and (b) as to the reasonableness of the scope of the restrictive covenant. Concur — Sandler, J. P., Sullivan, Markewich, Lupiano and Silverman, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Hasty Hyman, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered December 7, 1978, convicting him of two counts of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, on the law, and new trial ordered. Defendant was tried on two counts of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree after having been acquitted at a prior trial of sale and possession with intent to sell charges (a second trial was aborted during the presentation of the People’s case). At the instant trial the court allowed the prosecutor to introduce into evidence and play for the jury several tape recordings of conversations between an undercover officer and Rufus Boyd, a codefendant of the defendant at his prior trials. These conversations consisted of negotiations and arrangements regarding a large scale purchase of heroin. The only cautionary instruction given with respect to the tape recordings was to advise the jury that these conversations were not binding upon the defendant, but were admitted solely because he was accused of acting in concert. In addition, the undercover officer was permitted to testify as to her general experience regarding covert operations (e.g., the number of drug sales in which she had been a participant) and her visits to Rufus Boyd’s business establishment prior to the commencement of the "buy” operation in question. None of the tape recordings should have been received in evidence at defendant’s trial, since, *inter alia,*it did not relate to the possession charges against defendant but rather to the related sale counts of which he had already been acquitted. The testimony of the undercover officer regarding her general experience in covert operations and her prior visits to Rufus Boyd’s business establishment was allowed as background evidence. However, it is questionable whether this testimony was in any way relevant to the prosecution’s case on the possession charges (see *People v Cook,*42 NY2d 204). Certainly, this background material was not so inextricably interwoven with the present charges as to mandate their use (see *People v Vails,*43 NY2d 364). Moreover, any value that such evidence might have had to the prosecution was more than outweighed by the extreme prejudice to the defendant (see *People v Stanard,*32 NY2d 143; *People v Sorenson,*70 AD2d 892; *People v Gillespie,*58 AD2d 893). It should be noted briefly that the prosecutor compounded these errors by including in his summation several attempts to tie the defendant to Rufus Boyd and the drug sales. Standing alone, the court’s prompt action in twice sustaining objections to such statements would have sufficed to cure any prejudice. However, on the present record, these remarks were merely the culmination of a concerted effort to convict defendant based upon his association with Rufus Boyd. Titone, J. P., Lazer, Gulotta and Martuscello, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 31(ii)
                                --------------


                                CERTIFICATIONS
                                --------------

I, Steve Bailey, certify that:


      1.    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form
            10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this
            report on Form 10-K of CWABS Asset-Backed Certificates Trust
            2006-16 (the "Exchange Act periodic reports");

      2.    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as
            a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
            omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
            made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
            were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
            this report;

      3.    Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and
            other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the
            period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act
            periodic reports;

      4.    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
            servicer(s) and based on my knowledge and the compliance review(s)
            conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement(s)
            required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and
            except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the
            servicer(s) have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing
            agreement(s) in all material respects; and

      5.    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
            criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
            reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
            asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in
            accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
            13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report,
            except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material
            instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been
            disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

      In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
      information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The
      Bank of New York, as Trustee.

Date: March 26, 2007


      /s/ Steve Bailey
      ----------------------------
      Steve Bailey
      Senior Managing Director, Loan Administration
#### § 70.10 Basis of grading service.

(a) Any grading service in accordance with the regulations in this part shall be for class, quality, quantity, or condition or any combination thereof. Grading service with respect to determination of quality of products shall be on the basis of United States Classes, Standards, and Grades for Poultry and Rabbits. However, grading service may be rendered with respect to products which are bought and sold on the basis of institutional contract specifications or specifications of the applicant, and such service, when approved by the Administrator, shall be rendered on the basis of such specifications.

(b) Whenever grading service is provided for examination of quality, condition, or for test weighing on a representative sample basis, such sample shall be drawn and consist of not less than the minimum number of containers indicated in the following table. The number of representative samples for large bulk containers (combo bins, tanks, etc.) may be reduced by one-half. For quality or condition, all of the poultry and rabbits in each representative sample shall be examined except for individual ready-to-cook carcasses weighing under 6 pounds in large bulk containers. For individual carcasses weighing under 6 pounds in large bulk containers, 100 carcasses shall be examined for quality or condition. Procedures for test weighing shall be in accordance with those prescribed by the Administrator.

| Containers in lot | Containers in sample |
| --- | --- |
| 1-4 | All. |
| 5-50 | 4. |
| 51-100 | 5. |
| 101-200 | 6. |
| 201-400 | 7. |
| 401-600 | 8. |
| For each additional 100 containers, or fraction thereof, in excess of 600 containers | Include one additional container. |

[41 FR 23681, June 11, 1976. Redesignated at 42 FR 32514, June 27, 1977, and further redesignated at 46 FR 63203, Dec. 31, 1981, as amended at 71 FR 42012, 42014, July 24, 2006]