alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1427.306 Licensing background patent rights to third parties.       Any proposed determination to be made to require third party licensing shall be submitted by the HCA through the Assistant Solicitor for Acquisitions and Intellectual Property for signature of the AS/PMB. The contractor may request a public hearing on the record prior to the above determination. In such cases, the proposed determination and the contractor's request for a hearing shall be referred to OHA. OHA shall conduct public hearings as set forth in 1427.304-1(a)(4) and shall forward its findings and recommendations to the AS/PMB for a final determination. The final determination shall inform the contractor of the right to judicial review within sixty (60) days of the AS/PMB determination.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 1427.3 - Patent Rights Under Government Contracts.
|   | AMENDMENT                TO SERVICE AGREEMENT between SIMCLAR GROUP LIMITED, incorporated under the Companies Acts                (Registered                Number SC219243) and having its Registered Office at 5 Albyn                Place, Edinburgh (hereinafter referred to as “Simclar”) OF                THE FIRST PART |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |  and                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   | SIMCLAR INC., a Florida Corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Inc”) OF                THE SECOND PART                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |

| /s/                Samuel J. Russell |   | /s/                Elaine Pryde |
|--------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------|
| SJ                Russell            |   | Witness                         |
|                                 |   |                            |
| /s/                John Ian Durie    |   | /s/                Elaine Pryde |
| JI                Durie              |   | Witness                         |

| /s/                Barry J. Pardon  |   | /s/                Roxie Alvarez |
|-------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------|
| BJ                Pardon            |   | Witness                          |
|                                |   |                             |
| /s/                Marshall Griffin |   | /s/                Dusty Bowser  |
| MA                Griffin           |   | Witness                          |

----
Case 2:06-cr-00196-MHT-CSC Document 1 Filed 08/15/2006 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

vs. ) CR. NO. 2:06CR203-MHT

)

JOSEPH LEE STRINGER )

ORDER

Pursuant to the defendant’s Notice of Intent to Change Plea (Doc. # 14) filed on

October 18, 2006, it is hereby

ORDERED that the defendant’s change of plea hearing be and is hereby set for

October 23, 2006, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 4B, United States Courthouse Complex,

One Church Street, Montgomery, Alabama. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a court reporter for this proceeding. If the defendant

is in custody, the United States Marshal or the person having custody of the defendant shall

produce the defendant for the proceeding.

Done this 19 day of October, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00203-MHT-CSC Document 15 Filed 10/19/2006 Page 1 of 1
§ 15.60 Discharge of indebtedness; reporting requirements. ( a ) Before discharging a delinquent debt (also referred to as a close out of the debt), the NRC shall take all appropriate steps to collect the debt in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 3711(g), including, as applicable, administrative offset; tax refund offset; Federal salary offset; referral to Treasury, Treasury-designated debt collection centers, or private collection contractors; credit bureau reporting; wage garnishment; litigation; and foreclosure. Discharge of indebtedness is distinct from termination or suspension of collection activity under 10 CFR 15.55 and 15.57 and is governed by the Internal Revenue Code. When collection action on a debt is suspended or terminated, the debt remains delinquent, and further collection action may be pursued at a later date. When the NRC discharges a debt in full or in part, further collection action is prohibited. Therefore, the NRC will make the determination that collection action is no longer warranted before discharging a debt. Before discharging a debt, the NRC must terminate debt collection action.
( b ) Section 3711(i), title 31, United States Code, requires agencies to sell a delinquent nontax debt upon termination of collection action if Treasury determines such a sale is in the best interests of the United States. Since the discharge of a debt precludes any further collection action (including the sale of a delinquent debt), the NRC may not discharge a debt until the requirements of 31 U.S.C. 3711(i) have been met.
( c ) Upon discharge of an indebtedness, the NRC shall report the discharge to the IRS in accordance with the requirements of 26 U.S.C. 6050P and 26 CFR 1.6050P-1. The NRC may request Treasury or a Treasury-designated debt collection center to file a discharge report to the IRS on the NRC's behalf.
( d ) When discharging a debt, the NRC shall request that litigation counsel release any liens of record securing the debt.
[67 FR 30323, May 6, 2002]
§ 1042.425 Counseling and use of appraisal and counseling materials. ( a ) *Counseling.* A recipient shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of sex in the counseling or guidance of students or applicants for admission.
( b ) *Use of appraisal and counseling materials.* A recipient that uses testing or other materials for appraising or counseling students shall not use different materials for students on the basis of their sex or use materials that permit or require different treatment of students on such basis unless such different materials cover the same occupations and interest areas and the use of such different materials is shown to be essential to eliminate sex bias. Recipients shall develop and use internal procedures for ensuring that such materials do not discriminate on the basis of sex. Where the use of a counseling test or other instrument results in a substantially disproportionate number of members of one sex in any particular course of study or classification, the recipient shall take such action as is necessary to assure itself that such disproportion is not the result of discrimination in the instrument or its application.
( c ) *Disproportion in classes.* Where a recipient finds that a particular class contains a substantially disproportionate number of individuals of one sex, the recipient shall take such action as is necessary to assure itself that such disproportion is not the result of discrimination on the basis of sex in counseling or appraisal materials or by counselors.
Subpart 2436.6 - Architect-Engineer Services    **Parent topic:** PART 2436 - CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS2436.602 Selection of firms for architect-engineer contracts.2436.602-2 Evaluation boards.       (a) Each architect-engineer evaluation board, whether permanent or ad hoc (which may include preselection boards), shall consist of at least three voting members who are Federal employees from the appropriate program area or from Federal offices outside the program area as appropriate. One member of each board shall be appointed chairperson. Non-voting advisors may also be appointed, including private practitioners in architecture, engineering and related professions. The members of a permanent board shall be appointed for a period of two years. Appointment shall be made by the following authorities with copies of appointment memoranda furnished to the appropriate contracting activity:          (1) *Assistant Secretary* or equivalent for boards appointed at the Headquarters level;          (2) The cognizant program office head for boards appointed at the field level.          (c) *Conflict of interest.* Each board member, whether voting or nonvoting, shall be advised of, and presumed to be familiar with the regulations at 24 CFR part 0, Standards of Conduct, regarding conflicts of interest. If at any time during the selection process a board member encounters a situation with one or more of the firms being considered that might be or might appear to be a conflict of interest, he or she will disqualify him or herself and call it to the attention of the chairperson for resolution and proper action. The chairperson will refer the matter to legal counsel.          (d) *Confidentiality.* The evaluation board is to be insulated from outside pressures, to the extent practical. No person having knowledge of the activities of the board shall divulge information concerning the deliberations of the board to any other persons not having a need to know such information.2436.602-4 Selection authority.       (a) The final selection decision shall be made by the cognizant Primary Organization Head in headquarters, or field program office head.2436.602-5 Short selection processes for contracts not to exceed the small purchase limitation.       The short selection process described in FAR 36.602-5(a) is authorized for use for contracts not expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

V. ) CR. NO.: 3:06cr191-MHT

)

SPRING M. DAWSON )

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

NOW COMES the Defendant, SPRING M. DAWSON, by and through undersigned

counsel, Jennifer A. Hart, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(2) and 3161(h)(8)(B)(I),

respectfully moves this Court to continue the trial of this action from the present trial date of

June 4, 2007, to allow for the final resolution of pretrial diversion in this matter. In support of

this Motion, defendant would show:

1. The United States Attorney Office has approved Ms. Dawson for pretrial

diversion. 

2. This case is now in the hands of the United States Probation Office for completion

of the pretrial diversion "work up". Once the work up is completed, the government will file its

Motion to Dismiss the Information. 

3. Because prosecution will be deferred/diverted, pursuant to the agreement upon the

final work up, it is in the interest of justice to continue trial in this matter so as to allow the

parties to finalize Ms. Dawson’s diversion agreement. 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(2) and

3161(h)(8)(B)(I). 

4. The Government, through Assistant United States Attorneys, Kent Brunson, has

no opposition to the granting of a continuance. 

Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 21 Filed 05/18/2007 Page 1 of 3
WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully requests that this Motion be granted. 

Dated this 18 day of May, 2007. th

Respectfully submitted, 

s/Jennifer A. Hart

JENNIFER A. HART

FEDERAL DEFENDERS

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

201 Monroe Street, Suite 407

Montgomery, AL 36104

Phone: (334) 834-2099

Fax: (334) 834-0353

jennifer_hart@fd.org

AL Bar Code: HAR189

Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 21 Filed 05/18/2007 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 18, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk

of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the

following: Kent Brunson, Assistant U. S. Attorney.

Respectfully submitted,

s/Jennifer A. Hart

JENNIFER A. HART

FEDERAL DEFENDERS

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

201 Monroe Street, Suite 407

Montgomery, AL 36104

Phone: (334) 834-2099

Fax: (334) 834-0353

jennifer_hart@fd.org

AL Bar Code: HAR189

Respectfully submitted, 

Case 3:06-cr-00191-MHT-CSC Document 21 Filed 05/18/2007 Page 3 of 3
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

CHRISTINE BENNETT, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 1:06cv723-MHT

) 

ARMY FLEET SUPPORT LLC, )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER

It is ORDERED that the joint motion to refer (Doc.

No. 51) is granted.

DONE, this the 26th day of October, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00723-MHT-CSC Document 52 Filed 10/26/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### § 110.30 Members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group.

- Argentina
- Australia
- Austria
- Belarus
- Belgium
- Brazil
- Bulgaria
- Canada
- China
- Croatia
- Cyprus
- Czech Republic
- Denmark
- Estonia
- Finland
- France
- Germany
- Greece
- Hungary
- Iceland
- Ireland
- Italy
- Japan
- Kazakhstan
- Latvia
- Lithuania
- Luxembourg
- Malta
- Mexico
- Netherlands
- New Zealand
- Norway
- Poland
- Portugal
- Republic of Korea
- Romania
- Russia
- Serbia
- Slovak Republic
- Slovenia
- South Africa
- Spain
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Turkey
- Ukraine
- United Kingdom

[59 FR 48998, Sept. 26, 1994, as amended at 61 FR 35602, July 8, 1996; 65 FR 70291, Nov. 22, 2000; 75 FR 44089, July 28, 2010; 79 FR 39291, July 10, 2014]
# Subpart 731.1—Applicability

**Parent topic:**PART 731—CONTRACT COST PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES

## 731.109 Advance agreements.

Advance agreements on selected costs may be negotiated with USAID contractors by the Bureau for Management, Office of Acquisition and Assistance, Cost Audit Support Division, Overhead and Special Cost and Contract Close-Out Branch (M/OAA/CAS/OCC). Such advance understandings will be applicable to all USAID contracts with that contractor.
Subpart 1317.1 - Multi-Year Contracting

Parent topic: PART 1317 - SPECIAL CONTRACTING METHODS

1317.104 General.

The designee authorized to modify requirements of FAR Subpart 17.1 and FAR 52.217-2 is set forth

in CAM 1301.70.

1317.105 Policy.

1317.105-1 Uses.

The designee authorized to make the determination to enter into a multi-year contract is set forth in

CAM 1301.70.

1317.108 Congressional notification.

Written notification to Congress shall be handled in accordance with the policies and procedures

outlined in DAO 218-2.
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

HERBERT H. HENDERSON,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.: 3:04cv19/MCR/MD

JO ANNE B. BARNHART,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant.

 /

O R D E R

This cause comes on for considerationuponthe magistrate judge's report and

recommendation dated April 26, 2006. The plaintiff has been furnished a copy of the

report and recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections

pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1), and I have made a de

novo determination of those portions to which an objection has been made.

Having considered the report and recommendationandanyobjections thereto

timely filed, I have determined that the report and recommendation should be

adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The petition for authorization of attorney fees (doc. 35) is GRANTED as

modified in the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (see fn. 1).

3. The Commissioner is ordered to disburse the sum of $7,675.00 to

plaintiff’s counsel, Gilbert B. Laden, Esquire, as reasonable attorney fees under Title

42 U.S.C. § 406(b).

Case 3:04-cv-00019-MCR-MD Document 41 Filed 05/30/06 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 3:04cv19/MCR/MD

4. Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to refund to plaintiff the $1,750.00

previously awarded him by this court under the EAJA.

DONE AND ORDERED this 30th day of May, 2006.

 s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

Case 3:04-cv-00019-MCR-MD Document 41 Filed 05/30/06 Page 2 of 2
§ 110.31 Application for a specific license. ( a ) A person shall file an application for a specific license to export or import with the Deputy Director of the NRC's Office of International Programs, using an appropriate method listed in § 110.4.
( b ) Applications for an export, import, amendment or renewal licenses or a request for an exemption from a licensing requirement under this part shall be filed on NRC Form 7.
( c ) An application for a specific license to export or import or a request for an exemption from a licensing requirement must be accompanied by the appropriate fee in accordance with the fee schedules in § 170.21 and § 170.31 of this chapter. A license application will not be processed unless the specified fee is received.
( d ) Each application on NRC Form 7 shall be signed by the applicant or licensee or a person duly authorized to act for and on behalf of the applicant or licensee.
( e ) Each person shall provide in the license application, as appropriate, the information specified in § 110.32. The Commission also may require the submission of additional information if necessary to complete its review.
( f ) An application may cover multiple shipments and destinations.
( g ) The applicant shall withdraw an application when it is no longer needed. The Commission's official files retain all documents related to a withdrawn application.
[75 FR 44089, July 28, 2010]
162 So.2d 574

#### STATE of Louisiana v. Sam GREEN et al.

No. 47239.

April 17, 1964.

In re: Sam Green et al. applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition.

*1084Writs denied. There are no perfected bills of exception. See La.Code Crim.Proc. Art. 499, LSA-R.S. 15:499; State v. Richardson, 220 La. 338, 56 So.2d 568; State v. McDonald, 218 La. 198, 48 So.2d 797; State v. Foret, 245 La. 70, 156 So.2d 606; 245 La. 187, 157 So.2d 733. Moreover, there is no error patent on the face of the record.
#### § 981.74 Other reports.

Upon the request of the Board, made with the approval of the Secretary, every handler shall furnish to the Board in such manner and at such times as it prescribes (in addition to such other reports as are specifically provided for in this part) such other information as will enable the Board to perform its duties and exercise its powers hereunder.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DONNA BROWN, an individual; TIMOTHY BROWN, an individual

,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants

,

v.

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., FKA Wachovia Mortgage, FSB, FKA World Savings Bank, FSB, a corporation; Successor Wells Fargo Bank Southwest,

N.A.

,

Defendant

- Appellee

. No. 19

- 55064

D.C. No. 2:16

- cv

- 00642

- DMG

- AGR

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California Dolly M. Gee , District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 3 , 20 20 * *

Pasadena , California

Before: W. FLETCHER and LEE, Circuit Judges, and AMON

, ** * District Judge.

Donna and Timothy Brown appeal the district court’s denial of leave to amend

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Carol B. Amon , United States District Judge for the

Eastern District of New York , sitting by designation

. 

# FILED

JUN 26 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2

their complaint

. We review the denial of a motion to amend for abuse of discretion

.

See Chodos v. W. Publ ’

g Co. , 292 F.3d 992, 1003 (9th Cir. 2002)

. W e affirm.

1. The Browns argue for the first time on appeal that Wells Fargo Bank,

N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) acted as a “debt collector” under the Fair Debt Collection

Practices Act (“FDCPA”) because it serviced the Browns’ mortgage loan on behalf

of a securitized trust. Be cause this argument was not raised below, it has been

waived on appeal. See In re Mercury Interactive Corp. Sec. Litig. , 618 F.3d 988,

992 (9th Cir. 2010) (“[A] n issue will generally be deemed waived on appeal if the

argument was not raised sufficiently f or the trial court to rule on it. ”) (citations and

internal quotation marks omitted). 1

2. The Browns also now seek to add a state Rosenthal Act claim. But if a

“ party does not ask the district court for leave to amend, ‘ the request on appeal to

remand with instructions to permit amendment comes too late .’” Alaska v. United

States , 201 F.3d 1154, 1163

– 64 (9th Cir. 2000) (quoting Jackson v. Am

. Bar

Ass ’ n, 538 F.2d 829, 833 (9th Cir. 1976) ). Because the Browns did not seek leave

1 In an y event, the FDCPA exempts activity that “concerns a debt which was not in

default at the time it was obtained

. . . . ” 15 U.S.C. § 1692a (6)(F). It is undisputed that Wells Fargo obtained servicing rights to the Browns’ mortgage loan prior to any

default . As a result, the Browns likely c annot pursue a FDCPA claim based on Wells Fargo’s reporting on the mortgage loan. See De Dios v. Int’l Realty & Invs. , 641 F.3d 1071, 1074

– 76 (9th Cir. 2011) ( 15 U.S.C. § 1692a (6)(F) precluded FDCPA claim against property management company retained before default to collect monthly payments).3

of the district court to asser t a Rosenthal Act claim, they cannot do so for the first

time on appeal.

AFFIRMED

.
§ 110.66 Enforcement hearing. ( a ) If the licensee demands a hearing, the Commission will issue an order specifying the time and place.
( b ) A hearing pursuant to this subpart will be conducted under the procedures in subpart G of part 2 of this chapter.
[43 FR 21641, May 19, 1978, as amended at 75 FR 44093, July 28, 2010]