alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SUBCHAPTER E—GENERAL CONTRACTING

REQUIREMENTS

PART 1227—PATENTS, DATA, AND COPYRIGHTS

PART 1228—BONDS AND INSURANCE

PART 1231—CONTRACT COST PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES

PART 1232—CONTRACT FINANCING

PART 1233—PROTESTS, DISPUTES, AND APPEALS

PART 1227—PATENTS, DATA, AND COPYRIGHTS

Subpart 1227.3—Patent Rights Under Government Contracts

1227.304 Procedures.

1227.304-4 Appeals.

1227.305 Administration of patent rights clauses.

1227.305-4 Protection of invention disclosures.

PART 1228—BONDS AND INSURANCE

Subpart 1228.1—Bonds and Other Financial Protections

1228.106 Administration.

1228.106-470 Contract clause-notification of payment bond protection.

1228.106-6 Furnishing information.

1228.106-70 Execution and administration of bonds.

1228.106-71 Performance and payment bonds for certain contracts.

1228.106-7100 Waiver.

1228.106-7101 Exception.

Subpart 1228.3—Insurance

1228.306 Insurance under fixed-price contracts.

1228.306-70 Contracts for lease of aircraft.

1228.307-1 Group insurance plans.

1228.311-1 Contract clause.

PART 1231—CONTRACT COST PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES

Subpart 1231.2—Contracts With Commercial Organizations

1231.205 Selected costs.

1231.205-3270 Precontract costs—incurrence of costs.

PART 1232—CONTRACT FINANCING

Subpart 1232.7—Contract Funding

1232.770 Incremental funding during a Continuing Resolution.

1232.770-1 Scope of section.

1232.770-2 Definition.

1232.770-3 General.

1232.770-4 Policy.

1232.770-5 Limitations.

1232.770-6 Procedures.

1232.770-7 Clause.

Subpart 1232.9—Prompt Payment

1232.905-70 Payment documentation and process—form of invoice.

Subpart 1232.70—Electronic Invoicing Requirements

1232.7000 Scope of subpart.

1232.7001 Definition.
1232.7002 Electronic payment requests—invoices.

1232.7003 Payment system registration.

1232.7003-1 Electronic authentication.

1232.7004 Waivers.

1232.7005 Contract clause.

PART 1233—PROTESTS, DISPUTES, AND APPEALS

Subpart 1233.1—Protests

1233.103 Protests to the agency.

1233.104 Protests to GAO.

Subpart 1233.2—Disputes and Appeals

1233.211 Contracting officer's decision.

1233.214 Alternative dispute resolution (ADR).
ex10_2.htm


Goldspan Resources, Inc.

6260 South Rainbow

Suite 110

Las Vegas, NV 89118

818.340.4600

Fax 818.340.4545

lmc-cfo@socal.rr.com









February 12, 2010









TO: Mr. George Oswald

Wingspan Foundation, a private Panama corporation





RE: FULL CORPROATE OFFER – Dated February 12, 2010





The undersigned, having been authorized by the Board of Directors of Goldspan Resources, Inc., a Nevada Public Company, hereby agrees to terms and conditions of that FULL CORPROATE OFFER from Wingspan Foundation dated February 12, 2010.





The offer, among other things, provides that Goldspan shall fund up to $8,400,000 USD on an on-going basis in exchange for a thirty-five (35%) ownership position in the new entity that will be established for the ownership of the KOUSASSI-DATEKRO MANGANESE MINE.





Further, there shall be a 45 day due diligence period commencing from the date that our Vice President arrives at the property for inspection and testing.





We look forward to commencing our due diligence as of March 1, 2010 with the visit of Mr. David Hedderly-Smith, to commence the due diligence on this opportunity.





We look forward to a mutually rewarding relationship.





Very truly yours,

Goldspan Resources, Inc.

 

 


By: /s/ Leon Caldwell

Leon Caldwell, President
#### PECK, Respondent, v. NEHRING CO., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

June 19, 1914.)

Action by Nellie El.Peck against the l~ehring Company, a domestic corporation.

Earl A. Smith, of New York City, for appellant.

Benjamin Antin, of New York City, for respondent.

No opinion. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motkn deni~ed, with $10 costs. Order filed.
AeroUAVs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202 August 6
, 2 0 1 5

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Request for review of restrictions to E xemption No. 12153, Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 1641 under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations.

Dear Sir or Madam:
Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (the “Reform Act”) and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, AeroUAVs, LLC (AeroUAVs), seeks to request an amend ment to exemption No. 12153, Regulatory Docket No. FAA

– 2015

– 1641; Submitted by AeroUAVs for review April 20, 2015 and subsequently granted by the FAA on July 27, 2015.
The original exemption made a request to allow operations for:

 Aerial Photography and Videography for the real estate, construction, and utilities industries

 Agricultural Surveying and Application

 sUAS Operator Training

 Product Demonstrations

 Research and Development
In granting the exemption, the FAA included the following restriction:
“The petitioner also requested authority to conduct UAS training. At this time, the FAA is unable to authorize UAS operations for training until a further assessment is comp leted. When the FAA completes its review, we will proceed accordingly and no further action will be required by the petitioner. However, the petitioner is permitted to train its own pilot in commands and visual observers in accordance with condition no. 14 and the other conditions and limitations in this exemption.”
Training of sUAS operators other than AeroUAVs pilots is an essential part of our business plan and we respectfully request that the restriction be removed from exemption 12153. In reviewing cur rent exemptions, it appears that the FA A began adding the restriction to approvals sometime in mid

- June 2015. Exemption requests that included requests for Training Approvals were granted prior to that time. Namely the following Exemptions for sUAS trainin g have been granted: 11311, 11888, 11789, 11663, 11668, 11625 , 11552 , 11570, 11588, 11493, 11430 , 11301, and 11265.

We believe that our Manual submission has included Procedures and Training S tandards of at least a quality and safety standard equal to or greater than any of the above approvals. The requested exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental toAeroUAVs LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202

AeroUAVs. We therefore request the Removal o f the Training restriction form Exemption 12153
AeroUAVs will gladly provide any additional information requested by the FAA to expedite this approval
process.

Regards,

Timothy Ford President and CEO AeroUAVs, LLC 11523 Palmbrush Trail Suite 353 Lakewo od Ranch, FL 34202 (314) 397

- 1110
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

DENNIS NELSON, )

)

 Plaintiff, )

)

 v. ) 2:06-CV-770-MHT

) WO

REGIONS BANK, )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

On August 29, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case to which no

timely objections have been filed. Upon an independent review of the file in this case and upon

consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge which is hereby ADOPTED, it is 

ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant

to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i);

DONE, this the 25th day of September, 2006.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:06-cv-00770-MHT-DRB Document 5 Filed 09/25/2006 Page 1 of 1
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 243 (Monday, December 20, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 79334]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31779]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ARCTIC RESEARCH COMMISSION

Meeting Notice

    Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Arctic Research Commission 
will hold its 95th meeting in Anchorage, AK, on January 21, 2011. The 
business session, open to the public, will convene at 9 a.m.
    The Agenda items include:
    (1) Call to order and approval of the agenda.
    (2) Approval of the minutes from the 94th meeting.
    (3) Commissioners and staff reports.
    (4) Discussion and presentations concerning Arctic research 
activities.
    The focus of the meeting will be reports and updates on programs 
and research projects affecting the Arctic.
    If you plan to attend this meeting, please notify us via the 
contact information below. Any person planning to attend who requires 
special accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign 
language interpreters, must inform the Commission of those needs in 
advance of the meeting.
    Contact Person for Further Information: John Farrell, Executive 
Director, U.S. Arctic Research Commission, 703-525-0111 or TDD 703-306-
0090.

John Farrell,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2010-31779 Filed 12-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
```
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit
10.35

     

    


    OGE
ENERGY CORP.

    DIRECTORS’
COMPENSATION

     

    Compensation
of non-officer directors of the Company during 2009 included an annual retainer
fee of $100,000, of which $35,000 was payable in cash in monthly installments
and $65,000 was deposited in the director’s account under the Company’s Deferred
Compensation Plan in December 2009 and converted to 1,817.6734 common stock
units based on the closing price of the Company’s Common Stock on December 4,
2009. All non-officer directors received $1,200 for each Board meeting and
$1,200 for each committee meeting attended. The lead director and the chairman
of the audit committee received an additional $10,000 cash retainer. The
chairmen of the compensation and nominating and corporate governance committees
received an additional $5,000 annual cash retainer in 2009. Each chairman of a
board committee also received a meeting fee of $1,200 for each meeting (either
in person or by phone) with management to address committee matters. Each member
of the audit committee also received an additional annual retainer of $5,000.
These amounts represent the total fees paid to directors in their capacities as
directors of the Company and OG&E during 2009.

     

    
      Under the
Company’s Deferred Compensation Plan, non-officer directors may defer payment of
all or part of their attendance fees and the cash portion of their annual
retainer fee, which deferred amounts are credited to their account as of the
first of the month in which the deferred amounts otherwise would have been
paid.  Amounts credited to the accounts are assumed to be invested in
one or more of the investment options permitted under the Deferred Compensation
Plan.  During 2009, those investment options included an OGE Energy
common stock fund, whose value was determined based on the stock price of the
Company’s Common Stock, and various money market, bond and equity
funds.  When an individual ceases to be a director of the Company, all
amounts credited under the Deferred Compensation Plan are paid in cash in a lump
sum or installments.

       

      In
December 2009, the compensation committee met to consider director compensation.
At that meeting, the compensation committee increased the cash portion of the
annual retainer to $37,500 from $35,000 and increased the meeting fee from
$1,200 to $1,500.

    

     

    Historically,
for those directors who retired from the Board of Directors after 10 years or
more of service, the Company and OG&E continued to pay their annual cash
retainer until their death.  In November 1997, the Board eliminated
this retirement policy for directors.  Directors who retired prior to
November 1997, however, will continue to receive benefits under the former
policy.
920764.1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

JOHN DEREK WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

vs.

BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF 

ALABAMA, NEW HORIZONS 

CHURCH,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO.

2:06CV716

STIPULATION TO DISMISSAL

The parties, through counsel undersigned, having reach an amicable 

resolution of this civil action, stipulate that this civil action may be dismissed with 

prejudice, each party to bear its or their own costs and attorney fees.

Dated this 7th day of August, 2007.

s/J. Bernard Brannan, Jr.

One of the Attorneys for Plaintiff

John Derek Williams

OF COUNSEL:

J. Bernard Brannan, Jr.

The Brannan Law Firm, P.C.

602 South Hull Street

Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Case 2:06-cv-00716-WKW-WC Document 16 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 2
920764.1 2

s/Cavender C. Kimble

One of the Attorneys for Defendant,

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama

OF COUNSEL:

Cavender C. Kimble 

Balch & Bingham LLP

P.O. Box 306

Birmingham, Alabama 35201

s/Micheal S. Jackson 

One of the Attorneys for Defendant,

New Horizon Church

OF COUNSEL:

Micheal S. Jackson

Beers, Anderson, Jackson, Patty, Van Heest & Fawal, P.C.

P.O. Box 1988

Montgomery, Alabama 36102

CERTIFICATION OF CONSENT TO E-FILE

The undersigned certifies that he has been given express permission to 

submit the electronic signatures of all other counsel above and to e-file same.

s/Cavender C. Kimble 

Of Counsel

Case 2:06-cv-00716-WKW-WC Document 16 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 2 of 2
1308.802-70 Printing.

Insert clause 1352.208-70, Restrictions on Printing and Duplicating, in all solicitations and contracts

when printing documents may be required in the performance of the contract.

Parent topic: Subpart 1308.8 - Acquisition of Printing and Related Supplies
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       3,436,832
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,992,589<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  3,033,058<F2>
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,893,506
<PP&E>                                       4,984,880
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,590,701
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,408,023
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,702,041
<BONDS>                                      1,356,794
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        42,888
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,746,835
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,408,023
<SALES>                                     18,177,739
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            18,455,098
<CGS>                                       15,497,007
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,497,007
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,742,070
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             209,468
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,006,553
<INCOME-TAX>                                   306,289
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            700,264
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   700,264
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .13
<FN>
<F1>ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE ARE NET OF ALLOWANCE OF $98,000 AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1996.
<F2>INVENTORIES ARE NET OF RESERVE OF $124,000 AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1996.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
UN PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 6347

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. ALBERT SHAW NELSON , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Orangeburg

. Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior District Judge. ( 5:95

- cr - 00333

- CMC

- 5 )

Submitted : July 18, 2017 Decided: July 20, 2017

Before MOTZ, K ING , and DIAZ , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Albert Shaw Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Jane Barrett Taylor, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Albert Shaw Nelson ap peals the district co urt’s order dismissing his motion to reconsider the denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for reduction of
sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district cour t. United States v. Nelson , No. 5:95

- cr - 00333

- CMC

- 5 (D.S.C. Mar. 7, 2017) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional proces s. AFFIRMED
# Subpart 1842.70—Additional NASA Contract Clauses

**Parent topic:**PART 1842—CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND AUDIT SERVICES

## 1842.7001 Denied access to NASA facilities.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.242–72, Denied Access to NASA Facilities, in solicitations and contracts where contractor personnel will be working onsite at a NASA facility such as: NASA Headquarters and NASA Centers, including Component Facilities and Technical and Service Support Centers. For a list of NASA facilities see NPD 1000.3 “The NASA Organization”. The contracting officer shall not insert the clause where contractor personnel will be working onsite at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory including the Deep Space Network Communication Facilities (Goldstone, CA; Canberra, Australia; and Madrid, Spain). 

## 1842.7002 Travel outside of the United States.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.242–71, Travel Outside of the United States, in cost-reimbursement solicitations and contracts where a contractor may travel outside of the United States and it is appropriate to require Government approval of the travel. 

## 1842.7003 Emergency medical services and evacuation.

The contracting officer must insert the clause at 1852.242–78, Emergency Medical Services and Evacuation, in all solicitations and contracts when employees of the contractor are required to travel outside the United States or to remote locations in the United States.
**SitusHoldings, LLC**

2Embarcadero Center, Suite 1300 San Francisco, CA 94111 Phone: 415.374.2820 Fax: 415.374.2704 

**AnnualCompliance Statement**
**Forperiod of January 1 through December 31, 2013**

Depositor:                           MORGANSTANLEY CAPITAL I INC. Trustee:                              U.S.BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION CertificateAdministrator:     U.S.BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION 

Situs

Pursuant to Section 13.9 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, Iattest that: 

(A)

Areview of the activities of Situs Holdings, LLC, as Trust Advisor,during the period of January 1 through December 31, 2013 and of its performance under the Relevant ServicingCriteria has been made under my supervision. 

(B)

To thebest of my knowledge, based on such review, Situs Holdings, LLC, asTrust Advisor, has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in allmaterial respects throughout such period. 

By: 

___________________________________________

Date:_________________________________ 

LindaSanchez Managing Director
§ 19.30 Violations. ( a ) The Commission may obtain an injunction or other court order to prevent a violation of the provisions of— ( 1 ) The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
( 2 ) Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; or
( 3 ) A regulation or order issued pursuant to those Acts.
( b ) The Commission may obtain a court order for the payment of a civil penalty imposed under section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act: ( 1 ) For violations of— ( i ) Sections 53, 57, 62, 63, 81, 82, 101, 103, 104, 107, or 109 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
( ii ) Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act;
( iii ) Any rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant to the sections specified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section;
( iv ) Any term, condition, or limitation of any license issued under the sections specified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section.
( 2 ) For any violation for which a license may be revoked under section 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
[57 FR 55071, Nov. 24, 1992]
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 2.1321 Participation and schedule for submission in a hearing consisting of written comments. Unless otherwise limited by this subpart or by the Commission, participants in a hearing consisting of written comments may submit: ( a ) Initial written statements of position and written testimony with supporting affidavits on the issues. These materials must be filed on the date set by the Commission or the presiding officer.
( b ) Written responses, rebuttal testimony with supporting affidavits directed to the initial statements and testimony of other participants, and proposed written questions for the Presiding Officer to consider for submittal to persons sponsoring testimony submitted under paragraph (a) of this section. These materials shall be filed within 20 days of the filing of the materials submitted under paragraph (a) of this section, unless the Commission or Presiding Officer directs otherwise. Proposed written questions directed to rebuttal testimony for the Presiding Officer to consider for submittal to persons offering such testimony shall be filed within 7 days of the filing of the rebuttal testimony.
( c ) Written concluding statements of position on the issues. These materials shall be filed within 20 days of the filing of the materials submitted under paragraph (b) of this section, unless the Commission or the Presiding Officer directs otherwise.
[63 FR 66730, Dec. 3, 1998, as amended at 69 FR 2271, Jan. 14, 2004; 77 FR 46599, Aug. 3, 2012]
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED November 9, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-51309 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ROBERTO LORETO-VALERIO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:04-CR-1324-ALL

-------------------- Before REAVLEY, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Roberto LoretoValerio raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
226 So.2d 921

#### Edna Stewart KINCHEN v. Leonard KINCHEN, individually, Coy Kinchen, Inc., and Jackson W. Ratcliff.

No. 50037.

Oct 14, 1969.

In re: Edna Stewart Kinchen applying for certiorari or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of Livingston. 211 So.2d 91.,

It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.