alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SUBPART 19.2 – POLICIES

(Revised May 13, 2019 to Reflect Expiration of DEVIATION 19-02)

Parent topic: PART 19 – SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS

19.201 General policy.

(c)(10)(A) For procurements valued over $10,000 and less than the SAT that are not totally set aside,

the contracting officer shall document the reason for not setting aside the procurement on. DD Form

2579 and submit it to the procuring organization small business specialist for review.

(c)(10)(S-90) The contracting officer and the small business specialist shall—

(1) Conduct periodic reviews of automated awards to determine whether certain buys may be set

aside for Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned

Small Business (SDVOSB), Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB), or 8(a) program participants.

(2) Jointly consider backing out individual or groups of transactions from the automated systems,

based on a national stock number or federal supply class, with suppliers identified in the System for

Award Management (SAM) and Small Business Administration (SBA) repository for HUBZone,

SDVOSB, WOSB, or 8(a) program participants.

(c)(11) See 7.107-27.107-2 Consolidation. for policies regarding consolidations of contract

requirements.
Subpart 1833.1—Protests

Parent topic: PART 1833—PROTESTS, DISPUTES, AND APPEALS

1833.103 Protests to the agency.

(d)(4) The provision at 1852.233–70 provides for an alternative to a protest to the United States

Government Accountability Office (GAO). This alternative gives bidders or offerors the ability to

protest directly to the contracting officer (CO) or to request an independent review by the Assistant

Administrator for Procurement (or designee). The Agency review shall be deemed to be at the CO

level when the request is silent as to the level of review desired. The Agency review shall be deemed

to be at the level of the Assistant Administrator for Procurement (or designee) when the request

specifies a level above the CO, even if the request does not specifically request an independent

review by the Assistant Administrator for Procurement. Such reviews are separate and distinct from

the Ombudsman Program described at 1815.7001.

(e) NASA shall summarily dismiss and take no further action upon any protest to the Agency if the

substance of the protest is pending in judicial proceedings or the protester has filed a protest on the

same acquisition with the GAO prior to receipt of an Agency protest decision.

(4) When a bidder or offeror submits an Agency protest to the CO or alternatively requests an

independent review by the Assistant Administrator for Procurement, the decision of the CO or the

Assistant Administrator for Procurement shall be final and is not subject to any appeal or

reconsideration within NASA.

1833.106-70 Solicitation provision.

The contracting officer shall insert the provision at 1852.233–70 in all solicitations.
Editorial Note on Part 34
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 34 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 34.121 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 these 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.
Case 2:06-cv-00784-MEF-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00784-MEF-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00784-MEF-WC Document 1 Filed 09/01/2006 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit 99.1




Annual Servicer’s Certificate


Provided by Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation


to Holders of Notes and Certificates









NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION




OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE




The undersigned, Michael J. McConnell, Vice President of NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, a California corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, in his capacity as such corporate officer, as follows:




(1)           The undersigned has caused a review, under his supervision, to be made of i) the activities; and ii) the performance under the Agreement (as defined below), of the Company during the 12-month period ended March 31, 2015 (the “Reporting Period”); and




(2)           To the best of the undersigned’s knowledge, based upon such review, the Company has fulfilled its obligations in all material respects under the Agreement throughout the Reporting Period.




This Officer’s Certificate is being furnished pursuant to Section 4.09(a) of that certain Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of January 16, 2013 (the “Agreement”), by and among the Company, in its individual capacity and as servicer, Nissan Auto Receivables Corporation II, as seller, and Nissan Auto Receivables 2013-A Owner Trust.




Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand effective as of the 26th day of June, 2015.




/s/Michael J. McConnell________________


Michael J. McConnell


Vice President
#### § 429.116 Additional certification testing requirements.

Pursuant to § 429.102(b)(2), if DOE determines that independent, third-party testing is necessary to ensure a manufacturer's compliance with the rules of this part, part 430, or part 431, a manufacturer must base its certification of a basic model under subpart B of this part on independent, third-party laboratory testing.
----

| 1. | the      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the company for the quarterly period      ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission      on the date hereof (the “report”) fully complies with the requirements of      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;      and |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | the      information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the      company. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:     8/13/08    | /s/ Robert J.      Schoonover |
|---------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------|
|                                                    | Robert      J. Schoonover     |
|                                                    | President      and            |
|                                                    | Chief      Executive Officer  |

----
# SUBCHAPTER H - CLAUSES AND FORMS

- PART 1952 - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES 
- PART 1953 - FORMS 
- PARTS 1954-1999 [RESERVED] 
- List of IAAR Forms 

- PART 1952 - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES    - 1952.000   Scope of part.
  - Subpart 1952.1 - Instructions for Using Provisions and Clauses     - 1952.102-2   Incorporation in full text.
    - 1952.104   Procedures for modifying and completing provisions and clauses.
  - Subpart 1952.2 - Texts of Provisions and Clauses     - 1952.215-70   Key personnel and facilities.
    - 1952.227-76   Government rights (unlimited).
    - 1952.227-77   Rights in shop drawings.
    - 1952.227-78   Disposition of prints and videotape recordings.
- PART 1953 - FORMS    - Subpart 1953.3 - Illustrations of Forms     - 1953.300   Scope of subpart.
    - 1953.370   The Broadcasting Board of Governors forms.
- PARTS 1954-1999 [RESERVED]   
- List of IAAR Forms
PGI PART 15 – CONTRACTING BY

NEGOTIATION

PGI SUBPART 15.4 – CONTRACT PRICING

PGI 15.403-3 Requiring data other than certified cost or pricing data.

PGI SUBPART 15.4 – CONTRACT PRICING

PGI 15.403-3 Requiring data other than certified cost or pricing data.

(6)(ii) Instead of forwarding information directly to Defense Pricing and Contracting (DPC), HCAs

shall submit consolidated, validated reports to the DLA Acquisition Compliance, Policy and Pricing

Division Pricing Program Manager (PM) within 20 days after the end of each quarter. Negative

replies are required. The DLA Acquisition Compliance, Policy and Pricing Division Pricing PM will

consolidate all submitted reports and forward the DLA report to DPC. When the DLA Acquisition

Deputy Director is the HCA, contracting officers shall submit reports through the contracting chain

of command, in accordance with procedures established by the contracting office, to the DLA

Acquisition Compliance, Policy and Pricing Division Pricing PM, who will brief the DLA Acquisition

Deputy Director. Submit reports using the spreadsheet at Denials of Requests for Data Other than

Certified Cost or Pricing Data )

https://dlamil.dps.mil/sites/Acquisition/Shared%20Documents/J-72/4_%20Attachment_A-2_Denied_Da

ta_Requests_Template_with_2-Added_Columns.xlsx ).
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, 

NORTHERN DIVISION

J.B., a minor child, by and through his )

next friend, ADDIE WARD, on behalf of )

himself and all other similarly situated; )

) Case No: 2:06-CV-755-MHT

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

WALTER WOOD, in his individual )

capacity, )

)

Defendant. )

J.B., a minor child, by and through his )

next friend, ADDIE WARD, on behalf of )

himself and all other similarly situated; )

) Case No: 2:06-CV-908-MHT

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

WALTER WOOD, in his individual )

capacity, )

)

Defendant. )

WITNESS LIST

COMES NOW, the Defendant, J. Walter Wood, Jr., through counsel, and submits the

names of the following individuals who may be called by the Defendant as witnesses in the

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 65 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 1 of 3
above mentioned case: 

J. Walter Wood, Jr.

Alabama Department of Youth Services

P. O. Box 66

Mt. Meigs, AL 36057

Tim Davis

Alabama Department of Youth Services

P. O. Box 66

Mt. Meigs, AL 36057

Allen Peaton

Alabama Department of Youth Services

P. O. Box 66

Mt. Meigs, AL 36057

Patrick Pendergast

Alabama Department of Youth Services

P. O. Box 66

Mt. Meigs, AL 36057

J.B.

Alabama Department of Youth Services

P. O. Box 66

Mt. Meigs, AL 36057

Addie Ward

6016 Old Castle Place

Montgomery, AL 36117

Any witness identified on the Plaintiff’s witness list.

 Respectfully submitted,

TROY KING

ATTORNEY GENERAL

 s/ T. Dudley Perry, Jr. 

T. Dudley Perry, Jr. 

Bar Number: (PER-034)

Deputy Attorney General

Attorney for Defendants

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 65 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 2 of 3
Alabama Department of Youth Services

Post Office Box 66

Mt. Meigs, Alabama 36057

Telephone: (334) 215-3803

Fax: (334) 215-3872

E-Mail: dudley.perry@dys.alabama.gov 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I hereby certify that on the 22 day of August 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing nd

Witness List, with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification

of such filing to the following:

Robert D Drummond

Attorney at Law

323 De LaMare

Fairhope, AL 36532

Michael J. Crow

Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, P. C.

P. O. Box 4160

Montgomery, AL 36103-4160

Respectfully submitted,

TROY KING

ATTORNEY GENERAL

s/ T. Dudley Perry, Jr.

T. Dudley Perry, Jr.

Bar Number: (PER-034)

Deputy Attorney General

Attorney for Defendant

Alabama Department of Youth Services

Case 2:06-cv-00755-MHT-CSC Document 65 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 3 of 3
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 243 (Monday, December 20, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79376-79377]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31851]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than January 14, 2011.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (A. Linwood Gill, III, Vice 
President) 701 East Byrd Street, Richmond, Virginia 23261-4528:
    1. Piedmont Community Bank Holdings, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina; 
to acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of Community Bank of Rowan, 
Salisbury, North Carolina.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant 
Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:
    1. Commerce Bank and Trust Holding Company Employee Stock Ownership 
Plan, Topeka, Kansas; to acquire an additional 3.78 percent, for up to 
35.8 percent of the voting shares of Commerce Bank and Trust Holding 
Company, and thereby indirectly acquire additional voting shares of 
CoreFirst Bank & Trust, both in Topeka, Kansas.


[[Page 79377]]


    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 15, 
2010.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-31851 Filed 12-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 243 (Monday, December 20, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 79388]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31873]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R9-MB-2010-N281; 91200-1231-9BPP-L2]


Service Regulations Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter Service) will 
conduct an open meeting on February 2, 2011, to identify and discuss 
preliminary issues concerning the 2011-12 migratory bird hunting 
regulations.

DATES: The meeting will be held February 2, 2011.

ADDRESSES: The Service Regulations Committee will meet at the Embassy 
Suites Hotel, Denver--International Airport, 7001 Yampa Street, Denver, 
CO 80249; (303) 574-3000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chief, Division of Migratory Bird 
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, 
ms-4107-ARLSQ, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240; (703) 358-
1714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the authority of the Migratory Bird 
Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712), the Service regulates the hunting of 
migratory game birds. We update the migratory game bird hunting 
regulations, located at 50 CFR part 20, annually. Through these 
regulations, we establish the frameworks, or outside limits, for season 
lengths, bag limits, and areas for migratory game bird hunting. To help 
us in this process, we have administratively divided the nation into 
four Flyways (Atlantic, Mississippi, Central, and Pacific), each of 
which has a Flyway Council. Representatives from the Service, the 
Service's Migratory Bird Regulations Committee, and Flyway Council 
Consultants will meet on February 2, 2011, at 8:30 a.m. to identify 
preliminary issues concerning the 2011-12 migratory bird hunting 
regulations for discussion and review by the Flyway Councils at their 
March meetings.
    In accordance with Department of the Interior (hereinafter 
Department) policy regarding meetings of the Service Regulations 
Committee attended by any person outside the Department, these meetings 
are open to public observation.

    Dated: December 14, 2010.
Jerome Ford,
Acting Assistant Director, Migratory Birds, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-31873 Filed 12-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
Case 2:06-cv-00771-ID-SRW     Document 13      Filed 10/03/2006     Page 1 of 2

Case 2:06-cv-00771-ID-SRW     Document 13      Filed 10/03/2006     Page 2 of 2
#### Hubert G. Leising et al., Appellants, v. State of New York, Respondent.

(Claim No. 48059.)

—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellants to abide the event. Memorandum: The subject property was appropriated in connection with the proposed State University of New York project in Amherst, New York. Claimants’ appraisals were based on the assumption that the property would he rezoned from industrial to commercial use while the State’s appraiser did not give any consideration to a rezoning. The court found there was no reasonable probability of such rezoning and rejected the claimants’ appraisals and accepted that of the State. The State contends that any probability of rezoning should *1090not be considered since it would be a result of the university project. It appears, however, that there was a reasonable probability of rezoning without the influence of the State’s project. The subject property was part of a larger parcel of land purchased by the claimants in 1948. Maple Road was extended through claimants’ property in 1957 creating two corner parcels, and causing the subject property to lose the necessary depth for industrial development. The State’s appraiser admitted that the industrial classification was designed for a time when there was a single piece of property without Maple Road running through it, and that industrial-type developments are not put on double frontage properties. Also, property directly across Maple Road was rezoned in 1968 for a gasoline filling station; there is a gasoline filling station adjoining that property on Maple Road; diagonally across Millersport Highway from the subject property there is a gasoline filling station, and adjoining the latter property on Millersport Highway another gasoline filling station. Consequently, the State’s appraiser should have given consideration to the probability of rezoning. The claimants’ appraisers, on the other hand, should have given consideration to the possibility that there would be no rezoning. Further, none of the appraisers made the necessary adjustments to their com- • parables. The claimants’ appraisers did mention some factors which entered into their judgment but gave no dollars and cents adjustment or breakdown percentage-wise. The State’s appraiser did make an adjustment for frontage on two roads and because of the value of the subject property to a corporation which was acquiring land in the area. However, he made no adjustments for time, location or size. Thus, in any event, the necessary basis for making a determination of the value of the property is not before us. *(Geffen Motors*v. *State of New York,*33 A D 2d 980.) (Appeal from judgment of Court of Claims in claim for damages for permanent appropriation.) Present — Del Vecchio, J. P., Marsh, Moule, Bastow and Henry, JJ.
#### § 150.7 Persons in offshore waters not exempt.

Persons in offshore waters are not exempt from the Commission's licensing and regulatory requirements with respect to byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials.

[46 FR 44152, Sept. 3, 1981]
**EXHIBIT 35.1**

 

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

**New Holland Credit Company, LLC**

 

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of New Holland Credit Company, LLC (“NHCC”), as Servicer pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of November 1, 2012 (as amended from time to time, the “Sale and Servicing Agreement”) by and among NHCC, CNH Capital Receivables LLC and CNH Equipment Trust 2012-D, does hereby certify that:

 

1.             NHCC is Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement.

 

2.             The undersigned is duly authorized as required pursuant to the Sale and Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Indenture Trustee.

 

3.             This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 4.9(a) of the Sale and Servicing Agreement and Item 1123 of Regulation AB.

 

4.             A review of the Servicer’s activities during the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2013 and of its performance under the Sale and Servicing Agreement has been made under my supervision.

 

5.             To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Sale and Servicing Agreement in all material respects throughout the 12 month period ending (and including) December 31, 2013.

 

6.             IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has duly executed this Certificate this 27th day of March, 2014.

 

----

 

March 27, 2014

 

 
|   | By:    | /s/   Steven C. Bierman |
|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Name:  | Steven   C. Bierman     |
|   | Title: | President               |

 

----
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Andrew Williams, Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed and matter remitted to *873Onondaga County Court for a hearing in accordance with the following Memorandum : A factual issue is presented, as to whether or not appellant was represented 'by counsel at the time of his previous conviction in 1950 in the State of Ohio. A hearing is required. (Appeal from order of Onondaga County Court, denying, without a hearing, motion to vacate conviction for robbery, first degree, rendered December 27, 1960.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Witmer, Gabrielli, Bastow and Henry, JJ.
227 So.2d 145

#### O. L. SIMS COMPANY OF LOUISIANA, INC. v. INTERNATIONAL ENGINEERS, INC., et al.

No. 50046.

Oct. 23, 1969.

In re: O. L. Sims Company of Louisiana, Inc. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 224 So.2d 44.

Writ refused. On facts found by the Court of Appeal there is no error of law in the judgment complained of.