alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 12.201 Contents of application. ( a ) An application for an award of fees and expenses under the EAJA shall identify the applicant and the proceeding for which an award is sought. The application shall show that the applicant has prevailed and identify the position of the Commission or other agency that the applicant alleges was not substantially justified. Unless the applicant is an individual, the application shall also state the number of employees of the applicant and describe briefly the type and purpose of its organization or business.
( b ) The application shall also include a statement that the applicant's net worth does not exceed $2 million (if an individual) or $7 million (for all other applicants, including their affiliates). However, an applicant may omit this statement if: ( 1 ) The applicant attaches a copy of a ruling by the Internal Revenue Service that it qualifies as an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3)) or, in the case of a tax-exempt organization not required to obtain a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service on its exempt status, a statement that describes the basis for the applicant's belief that it qualifies under this section; or
( 2 ) The applicant states that it is a cooperative association as defined in section 15(a) of the Agricultural Marketing Act (12 U.S.C. 1141j(a)).
( c ) The application shall state the amount of fees and expenses for which an award is sought.
( d ) The application may also include any other matters that the applicant wishes the Commission to consider in determining whether, and in what amount, an award should be made.
( e ) The application shall be signed by the applicant or an authorized officer or attorney of the applicant. It shall also contain or be accompanied by a written verification under oath or under penalty of perjury that the information provided in the application is true and correct.
#### § 14.57 Suit against United States exclusive remedy.

The remedy against the United States provided by 28 U.S.C. 1346(b) and 2672 for damage to or loss of property or personal injury or death, resulting from the operation by an employee of the Government of any motor vehicle while acting within the scope of his or her office or employment, is exclusive of any other civil action or proceeding by reason of the same subject matter against the employee or his or her estate whose act or omission gave rise to the claim.
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.605 Additional considerations. ( a ) The Commission will not conduct more than one review of site suitability issues with regard to a particular site prior to filing and review of part two of the application described in § 2.101(a-1) of this part.
( b ) The Commission, upon its own initiative, or upon the motion of any party to the proceeding filed at least 60 days prior to the date of the commencement of the evidentiary hearing on site suitability issues, may decline to initiate an early hearing or render an early partial decision on any issue or issues of site suitability: ( 1 ) In cases where no partial decision on the relative merits of the proposed site and alternative sites under subpart A of part 51 of this chapter is requested, upon determination that there is a reasonable likelihood that further review would identify one or more preferable alternative sites and the partial decision on one or more site suitability issues would lead to an irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources prior to the submittal of the remainder of the information required by § 50.30(f) of this chapter that would prejudice the later review and decision on such alternative sites; or
( 2 ) In cases where it appears that an early partial decision on any issue or issues of site suitability would not be in the public interest considering: ( i ) The degree of likelihood that any early findings on those issues would retain their validity in later reviews;
( ii ) The objections, if any, of cognizant State or local government agencies to the conduct of an early review on those issues; and
( iii ) The possible effect on the public interest and the parties of having an early, if not necessarily conclusive, resolution of those issues.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

v. ) CR NO. 2:06-cr-202-WKW

)

EUGENE CLECKLER )

)

)

ORDER

It is ORDERED that the sentencing scheduled for April 10, 2007, is CONTINUED to

 May 8, 2007, at 2:00 p.m. in the Frank M. Johnson U.S. Courthouse Complex, One Church Street,

Montgomery, Alabama. 

DONE this 6th day of April, 2007.

 /s/ W. Keith Watkins 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cr-00202-WKW-CSC Document 97 Filed 04/06/2007 Page 1 of 1
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3435 

To suspend temporarily the duty on acrylic or modacrylic synthetic filament 

tow. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 6, 2006 

Mr. BURR introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on acrylic or modacrylic 

synthetic filament tow. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. ACRYLIC OR MODACRYLIC SYNTHETIC FILA4 MENT TOW. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

8 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.06.41 Synthetic filament tow: 

acrylic or modacrylic (provided for in subheading 

5501.30.00) ......................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2009 ’’. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•S 3435 IS 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.606 Partial decision on site suitability issues in construction permit proceeding. ( a ) The provisions of §§ 2.331, 2.339, 2.340(b), 2.343, 2.712, and 2.713 apply to any partial initial decision rendered in accordance with this subpart. Section 2.340(c) does not apply to any partial initial decision rendered in accordance with this subpart. No construction permit or combined license may be issued without completion of the full review required by Section 102(2) of the NEPA, as amended, and subpart A of part 51 of this chapter. The authority of the Commission to review such a partial initial decision *sua sponte,* or to raise *sua sponte* an issue that has not been raised by the parties, will be exercised within the same time as in the case of a full decision relating to the issuance of a construction permit or combined license.
( b ) ( 1 ) A partial decision on one or more site suitability issues pursuant to the applicable provisions of part 50, subpart A of part 51, and part 100 of this chapter issued in accordance with this subpart shall: ( i ) Clearly identify the site to which the partial decision applies; and
( ii ) Indicate to what extent additional information may be needed and additional review may be required to enable the Commission to determine in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the applicable provisions of the regulations in this chapter whether a construction permit for a facility to be located on the site identified in the partial decision should be issued or denied.
( 2 ) Following either the Commission (acting in the function of a presiding officer) issuance of a partial initial decision, or completion of Commission review of the partial initial decision of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, after hearing, on the site suitability issues, the partial decision shall remain in effect either for a period of 5 years or, where the applicant for the construction permit has made timely submittal of the information required to support the application as provided in § 2.101(a-1), until the proceeding for a permit to construct a facility on the site identified in the partial decision has been concluded,[3] unless the Commission or Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, upon its own initiative or upon motion by a party to the proceeding, finds that there exists significant new information that substantially affects the earlier conclusions and reopens the hearing record on site suitability issues. Upon good cause shown, the Commission may extend the 5-year period during which a partial decision shall remain in effect for a reasonable period of time not to exceed 1 year.
[72 FR 49479, Aug. 28, 2007, as amended at 72 FR 57440, Oct. 9, 2007] Footnotes -
2.606
[3] The partial decision on site suitability issues shall be incorporated in the decision regarding issuance of the combined license to the extent that it serves as a basis for the decision on a specific site issue.
#### § 14.39 Reconsideration of a claim.

Prior to the commencement of suit and prior to the expiration of the 6-month period provided in 28 U.S.C. 2401(b), a claimant, or his or her duly authorized agent, or legal representative, may file a written request with the NRC for reconsideration of a final denial of a claim. Upon the timely filing of a request for reconsideration, the NRC shall have 6 months from the date of filing in which to make a final disposition of the claim, and the claimant's option under 28 U.S.C. 2675(a) does not accrue until 6 months after the filing of a request for reconsideration. Final NRC action on a request for reconsideration shall be effected in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 14.37.
Subpart 334.2 - Earned Value Management System    **Parent topic:** PART 334 - MAJOR SYSTEM ACQUISITION334.201 Policy.       The Department of Health and Human Services applies the earned value management system requirement as follows:          (a) For cost or incentive contracts and subcontracts valued at $20 million or more, the contractor's earned value management system shall comply with the guidelines in the American National Standards Institute/Electronic Industries Alliance Standard 748, Earned Value Management Systems (ANSI/EIA-748).          (b) For cost or incentive contracts and subcontracts valued at $50 million or more, the contractor shall have an earned value management system that has been determined by the cognizant Federal agency to be in compliance with the guidelines in ANSI/EIA-748.          (c) For cost or incentive contracts and subcontracts valued at less than $20 million -          (1) The application of earned value management is optional at the discretion of the program/project manager and is a risk-based decision that must be supported by a cost/benefit analysis; and          (2) A decision to apply earned value management shall be documented in the contract file.          (d) For firm-fixed-price contracts and subcontracts of any dollar value the application of earned value management is discouraged.334.202 Integrated Baseline Reviews (IBRs).       (a) An IBR normally should be conducted as a post-award activity. A pre-award IBR may be conducted only if -          (1) The acquisition plan contains documentation that demonstrates the need and rationale for a pre-award IBR, including an assessment of the impact on the source selection schedule and the expected benefits;          (2) The use of a pre-award IBR is approved in writing by the head of the contracting activity prior to the issuance of the solicitation;          (3) The source selection plan and solicitation specifically addresses how the results of a pre-award IBR will be used during source selection, including any weight to be given to it in source evaluation; and          (4) Specific arrangements are made, and budget authority is provided, to compensate all offerors who prepare for or participate in a pre-award IBR; and the solicitation informs prospective offerors of the means for and conditions of such compensation.
|  (logo) WELLS

           FARGO | Commercial Mortgage Servicing

D1086-120, 12th Floor 

550 South Tryon Street 

Charlotte, NC 28202

1-800-326-1334 |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

 

 

Reference is hereby made to that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of December 1, 2012, by and among Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc., as Depositor, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Master Servicer, Certificate Administrator, Tax Administrator and Custodian, Midland Loan Services, a division of PNC Bank, National Association, as Special Servicer, Pentalpha Surveillance LLC, as Trust Advisor and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, with respect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates WFRBS 2012-C10 (the "Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.12 of this Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of Commercial Mortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1. A review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per the Agreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and

 

2. To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 4th day of March 2016.

 

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

|  Wells Fargo Bank, N.A |  (logo) Together we’ll go far

  |
|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 201 

Referring the bill (H.R. 1328) entitled ‘‘A bill for the relief of Adela and 

Darryl Bailor’’ to the chief judge of the United States Court of Federal 

Claims for a report thereon. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 6, 2005 

Ms. CARSON submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Referring the bill (H.R. 1328) entitled ‘‘A bill for the relief 

of Adela and Darryl Bailor’’ to the chief judge of the 

United States Court of Federal Claims for a report 

thereon. 

1 Resolved, 

2 REFERRAL

3 SECTION 1. The bill (H.R. 1328), entitled ‘‘A bill for 

4 the relief of Adela and Darryl Bailor’’, now pending in 

5 the House of Representatives, together with all the accom6 panying papers, is referred to the chief judge of the United 

7 States Court of Federal Claims. 
2 

•HRES 201 IH 

1 PROCEEDINGS AND REPORT

2 SEC. 2. Upon receipt of the bill under section 1, the 

3 chief judge shall— 

4 (1) proceed under sections 1492 and 2509 of 

5 title 28, United States Code; and 

6 (2) report back to the House of Representa7 tives, at the earliest practicable date, providing— 

8 (A) such findings of fact and conclusions 

9 of law are sufficient to inform Congress of the 

10 nature, extent and character of the claim for 

11 the compensation referred to in the bill as a 

12 legal or equitable claim against the United 

13 States; and 

14 (B) the amount, if any, legally or equitably 

15 due from the United States to Adela and 

16 Darryl Bailor. 

Æ
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

EASTERN DIVISION

GENE COGGINS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) 3:06-CV-00687-WHA

) [WO]

GLORIA SINCLAIR, Probate Judge, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER ON MOTIONS

For the good cause following review of the pending motions in his action, it is ORDERED

as follows:

1. The Motion to Reactivate Motion to Dismiss filed on October 10, 2006, by Defendants

Tallapoosa County and Tallapoosa County Probate Judge Gloria Sinclair (Doc. 18) is GRANTED

to the extent of the request for reactivation of these defendants’ previously stayed motion to dismiss

(Doc. 3).

2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Correction of Spelling and Zip Code (Doc. 6)is GRANTED to the

extent of its request to state correctly the name – Robin Jacob – and the zip code in Auburn,

Alabama, for the defendant named in his original complaint as Robin Jackors.

3. The Clerk is further DIRECTED to “terminate” Plaintiff’s pleading docketed as a Motion

to Dismiss on September 15, 2006 (Doc. 13), and to docket it instead as “Plaintiff’s Opposition to

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. This re-docketing is ordered pursuantto (a) the Doc.12 Order granting

Defendants’ Motion for More Definite Statement, and (b) the Doc. 14 Order advising that the pleading

by Plaintiff, notwithstanding its caption as a dismissal motion, “can be construed properly and

Case 3:06-cv-00687-WHA-DRB Document 20 Filed 10/16/2006 Page 1 of 2
2

considered as nothing more than arguments in opposition to Defendants’ dismissal motion.”

 4. Filed herewith is the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation that the only other pending

 motion in this action, Defendants’ dismissal motion (Doc. 3), be granted and this action dismissed

in its entirety. 

Done this 16 day of October, 2006. th

/s/ Delores R. Boyd

DELORES R. BOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00687-WHA-DRB Document 20 Filed 10/16/2006 Page 2 of 2
#### § 985.67 Agents.

The Secretary may, by designation in writing, name any officer or employee of the United States or name any agency or division in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, to act as the Secretary's agent or representative in connection with any of the provisions of this part.
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.813 Written communications. ( a ) *General requirements.* All correspondence, reports, and other written communications from the applicant to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission concerning the regulations in this subpart, and parts 50, 52, and 100 of this chapter must be sent either by mail addressed: ATTN: Document Control Desk, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; by hand delivery to the NRC's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. eastern time; or, where practicable, by electronic submission, for example, via Electronic Information Exchange, e-mail, or CD-ROM. Electronic submissions must be made in a manner that enables the NRC to receive, read, authenticate, distribute, and archive the submission, and process and retrieve it a single page at a time. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions can be obtained by visiting the NRC's Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html ;* by e-mail to *MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov ;* or by writing the Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The guidance discusses, among other topics, the formats the NRC can accept, the use of electronic signatures, and the treatment of nonpublic information. If the communication is on paper, the signed original must be sent. If a submission due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the next Federal working day becomes the official due date.
( b ) *Form of communications.* All paper copies submitted to meet the requirements set forth in paragraph (a) of this section must be typewritten, printed or otherwise reproduced in permanent form on unglazed paper. Exceptions to these requirements imposed on paper submissions may be granted for the submission of micrographic, photographic, or similar forms.
( c ) *Regulation governing submission.* An applicant submitting correspondence, reports, and other written communications under the regulations of this chapter is requested but not required to cite whenever practical, in the upper right corner of the first page of the submission, the specific regulation or other basis requiring submission.
[72 FR 49482, Aug. 28, 2007, as amended at 74 FR 62679, Dec. 1, 2009; 80 FR 74978, Dec. 1, 2015]
2129.401-70 FEGLI Program contract

clauses.

The fixed-price contract clauses in FAR subpart 29.4 are inappropriate for the FEGLI Program

because of the limited cost-redetermination of FEGLI Program contracts. The clauses at FAR

52.229-1, 52.229-2, 52.229-3, and 52.229-4 shall not be inserted into FEGLI Program contracts.

Parent topic: Subpart 2129.4 - Contract Clauses
§ 930.21 Reestablishment. Districts, subdivisions of districts, and the distribution of representation among growers and handlers within a respective district or subdivision thereof, or among the subdivision of districts, may be reestablished by the Secretary, subject to the provisions of § 930.23, based upon recommendations by the Board. In recommending any such changes, the Board shall consider: ( a ) The relative importance of producing areas;
( b ) Relative production;
( c ) The geographic locations of producing areas as they would affect the efficiency of administration of this part;
( d ) Shifts in cherry production within the districts and the production area;
( e ) Changes in the proportion and role of growers and handlers within the districts; and
( f ) Other relevant factors.
CONFIDENTIAL 

MSDS
52.229-5 [Reserved]

Parent topic: 52.229 [Reserved]
307.105 Contents of written acquisition plans.       Federal Acquisition Regulation 7.105 specifies the content requirements for a written Acquisition Plan (AP). The Department of Health and Human Services requires a written AP for all acquisitions above the simplified acquisition threshold.    **Parent topic:** PART 307 - ACQUISITION PLANNING
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ANGELA DENISE NAILS, )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06cv737-WKW

)

DOTHAN RESCUE MISSION, )

 )

Defendant. )

ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the above-referenced case be set for a scheduling

conference on October 27, 2006 at 3:00 p.m. in courtroom 5-B, Frank M. Johnson, Jr. United

States Courthouse Complex, One Church Street, Montgomery, Alabama.

DONE, this 18th day of October, 2006.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 12 Filed 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1
Subpart 2816.2 - Fixed-Price Contracts

Parent topic: PART 2816 - TYPES OF CONTRACTS

2816.207 Firm-fixed-price, level-of-effort term contracts.

2816.207-3 Limitations.

The BPC or designee is the chief of the contracting office for the purposes of FAR 16.207-3(d).