alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1223.7000 Contract clauses.

(a) Where all or part of a contract will be performed on Government-owned or leased property, the

contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1252.223–71, Accident and Fire Reporting.

(b) For all solicitations and contracts under which human test subjects will be utilized, the

contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1252.223–72, Protection of Human Subjects.

Contractors can request copies of applicable Operating Administration (OA)-specific policies

regarding the protection of human subjects directly from contracting officers.

(c) In all solicitations and contracts exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, the contracting

officer shall insert the clause at 1252.223–73, Seat Belt Use Policies and Programs.

Parent topic: Subpart 1223.70—Safety Requirements for Selected DOT Contracts
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2:06cv-736-WKW

)

SEVENTY FOUR THOUSAND SEVEN )

HUNDRED ($74,700) DOLLARS IN )

UNITED STATES CURRENCY, )

)

Defendant. )

UNITED STATES’ NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

Comes now the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney for

the Middle District of Alabama, Tommie Brown Hardwick, and enters

her notice of appearance on behalf of the United States, in the

above-styled cause.

Respectfully submitted this 24 day of April, 2008. th

LEURA G. CANARY

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

/s/Tommie Brown Hardwick

TOMMIE BROWN HARDWICK

Assistant United States Attorney

Bar Number: ASB4152 W86T

131 Clayton Street

Montgomery, Alabama 36104

Phone: (334) 223-7280

Fax: (334) 223-7135

E-mail: tommie.hardwick@usdoj.gov

Case 2:06-cv-00736-WKW-SRW Document 45 Filed 04/24/2008 Page 1 of 2
1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on April 24, 2008, 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: Bruce Maddox.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/Tommie Brown Hardwick

TOMMIE BROWN HARDWICK

Assistant United States Attorney

Case 2:06-cv-00736-WKW-SRW Document 45 Filed 04/24/2008 Page 2 of 2
#### § 15.8 Information collection requirements: OMB approval.

This part contains no information collection requirements, and therefore, is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.*).

[67 FR 30319, May 6, 2002]
#### MALONE, Respondent, v. SCHMITT, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

June 5, 1914.)

Action by Elizabeth G. Malone against Constantine Schmitt.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
#### § 207.9 Exceptions, exemptions, interpretations, rulings and rulemaking.

Applications for exceptions, exemptions or requests for interpretations relating to this subpart shall be filed in accordance with the procedures provided in subparts D, E and F, respectively, of part 205 of this chapter. Rulings shall be issued in accordance with the procedures of subpart K of part 205 of this chapter. Rulemakings shall be undertaken in accordance with the procedures provided in subpart L of part 205 of this chapter.
(May 20, 1969)

#### Bernard Duquette, Respondent, v. Board of Supervisors of the County of Franklin, Appellant, et al., Respondent.

Per *Curiam.*

Appeal from judgment entered April 2, 1969 in Franklin County, which adopted a plan for reapportionment of the Board of Supervisors of Franklin County submitted by the board in accordance with a prior decision made upon holding the existing apportionment invalid. Judgment affirmed, without costs. The total population, according to the 1960 United States census figures, is 44,742. Absolute population equality among the seven districts contemplated by the court-adopted plan would mean a population of 6,391 in each district. The largest district projected contains 6,546 residents, and the smallest 6,343. The difference between the least and the most populous districts is thus 203. The ratio of the largest to the smallest district is 1.03 to 1. The rule most recently enunciated is that, absent acceptable explanation, any deviation from precise mathematical equality, no matter how small, would not ordinarily be approved *(Kirkpatrick*v. Presler, —— U. S.——). Despite some slight measure of infirmity, however, we conclude that the present time exigencies require that the plan as adopted should govern the 1969 elections and continue thereafter until validly superseded. *(Honig*v. *Board of Supervisors of Rensselaer County,*31 A D 2d 989, affd. 24 N Y 2d——.) We have given consideration to the probability that the 1970 census figures will be available during the life of the board to be elected in 1969. Gibson, F. J., Aulisi, Staley, Jr., Cooke and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum *Per Curiam.*
223 So.2d 874

#### STATE ex rel. Julia Chambers STOKES et al. v. Adelaide Jones STOKES (Adlay Jones Stokes).

No. 49934.

June 27, 1969.

In re: Adelaide Jones Stokes (Adlay Jones Stokes) applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, Parish of East Baton Rouge. 222 So.2d 573.

Writ refused. There is no error of law in the Court of Appeal judgment on the facts found.
Exhibit 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Clean Systems  Technology Group,
Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
David Robbins,  President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company  certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:

     (1) The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
Section 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 result of  operations of the
Company.


Date: April 12, 2005


By: /S/ JACOB LUSTGARTEN
----------------------------
Jacob Lustgarten
Chief Executive Officer and
Chairman of the Board



     This  certification  accompanies  the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
#### § 1015.300 Scope.

This subpart sets forth the standards for the compromise of claims under this part. This subpart corresponds to 31 CFR part 902 of the Treasury Federal Claims Collection Standards.
2101.370 Effective date of LIFAR amendments.       (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, an amendment to the LIFAR is effective when promulgated or as provided in the amendment.          (b) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, if the LIFAR is amended in a manner which would increase the contractor's(s') costs or liabilities under the contract(s), the amendment will be made effective the October 1 subsequent to the amendment's promulgation, unless the contractor(s) agree(s) in writing to an earlier date.          (c) Except as provided for in paragraph (d) of this section, if the LIFAR is amended between July 31 and October 1 in a manner which would increase the contractor's(s') costs or liabilities under the contract(s), the amendment will not be effective until the October 1 in the year following the amendment's promulgation, unless the contractor(s) agree(s) in writing to an earlier date.          (d) Paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section are not applicable to amendments that are necessary to implement new or existing legislation.          (e) OPM will not initiate any changes to the LIFAR during a continuity of services period, as discussed in section 2152.237-70 of this chapter.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 2101.3 - Agency Acquisition Regulations
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

FARMERS TELECOMMUNICATIONS )

COOPERATIVE, INC., )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06CV790-WC

 )

VERIZON BUSINESS NETWORK )

SERVICES INC., et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

ORDER ON MOTION

Upon consideration of Defendant Qwest Communications Corporation's Motion to

Withdraw (Doc. #52) Counsel Leigh Anne Hodge, filed on October 2, 2007, it is 

ORDERED that the motion (Doc. #52) is GRANTED. Qwest Communications

Corporation will continue to be represented by attorneys Robin Laurie and Joe Seawell

Moore of the law office of Balch & Bingham LLP.

DONE this 3rd day of October, 2007.

/s/ Wallace Capel, Jr.

WALLACE CAPEL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 54 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 54 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit No. 32.   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002   In connection with this report of Questar Pipeline Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), R. Allan Bradley, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Martin H. Craven, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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.  QUESTAR PIPELINE COMPANY   August 10, 2010 /s/R. Allan Bradley R. Allan Bradley President and Chief Executive Officer    August 10, 2010 /s/Martin H. Craven Martin H. Craven Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
# MUNICIPALITY OFYIGO

# rJlllllllr:w'~ Mayor's Council ofGuam SI0-100304-003 P.o. Box 11670Yigo, Guam 96929 CONTROL NO. Ronald "Ron" J. Flores ViceMayor February 19, 2010 The Honorable Ray LaHood Secretary United States Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, SE Washington, D.C. 20590 Subject: Haneda Combination Services Allocation Proceeding DOT-OST-2010-0018 Dear Secretary LaHood: I am writing in support ofContinental Micronesia's application to provide daily nonstop service between Guam and Tokyo Haneda airport. New air service to Haneda, which is scheduled to begin laterthis year, is made possible by the achievements ofyouroffice in securing a wide ranging open skies agreement with Japan. I applaud your efforts on the historic open skies agreement and now urge you to select Continental Micronesia to provide service connecting Guam's tourism and trade industry with Tokyo's central/downtown airport. Guam's economy in part depends upontouristtrafficfrom pOints across theAsian region, with Japan being a critical tourist marketforthe island. Haneda isideally situated for the Japanese tourist who lives in central and southern/western Tokyo, and obtaining U.S. carrier scheduled service to/from Haneda will

. be a boost to Guam's travel marketing efforts. As Continental Micronesia is the only<:arrier operating a hub on Guam Continental Micronesia is the right choice for new Haneda service. Communities around Guam such as Saipan will also benefitfrom one-stop connections at Guam's airportto Haneda. Increased competition by U.S. carriers and the opportunityto choose among Continental Micronesia service and air services offered by Japanese airlines is importantto our island ,communities. Continental Micronesia's commitment to the Japanese market and our region is proven bythe carrier's recent addition offlightsto Fiji and Hong Kong. Service to Haneda further supplementsthe airline's growth, and therefore employment and economic benefits for Guam. I urge you to award Tokyo Haneda service to Continental Micronesia and my region ofthe U.S. Regards, Regards,

# Q~

# ~#~res Mayor Vice Mayor 

# 3i OFFICE OF THE MAYOR (671) 653-YIGO (9446), 653·5248 Fax: (671) 653-3434 Ancient LaUe StQneJ!o B-mai1: rslizama@yahoo.com vmyigo@yahoo.com
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000764579
<NAME> CAS MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,827,524
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      738,124
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                        819,932
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,521,112
<PP&E>                                           1,015,005
<DEPRECIATION>                                     829,024
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   3,826,515
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              605,045
<BONDS>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                            37,317
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<OTHER-SE>                                               0 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     3,826,515
<SALES>                                          3,292,271
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,441,275
<CGS>                                            1,388,658
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,475,068
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (32,027)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    609,576
<INCOME-TAX>                                       246,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       363,576
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                          .04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                          .04
        

</TABLE>
Subpart 1253.2—Prescription of Forms

Parent topic: PART 1253—FORMS

1253.204-70 Administrative matters—agency specified

forms.

The following forms are prescribed for use in the closeout of applicable contracts, as specified in

1204.804–570:

(a) Department of Transportation (DOT) Form DOT F 4220.4, Contractor's Release. Form DOT F

4220.4 is authorized for local reproduction and a copy may be obtained at

https://www.transportation.gov/assistant-secretary-administration/procu....

(b) Form DOT F 4220.45, Contractor's Assignment of Refunds, Rebates, Credits, and Other Amounts.

Form DOT F 4220.45 is authorized for local reproduction and a copy may be obtained at

https://www.transportation.gov/assistant-secretary-administration/procu....

(c) Form DOT F 4220.46, Cumulative Claim and Reconciliation Statement. Form DOT F 4220.46 is

authorized for local reproduction and a copy may be obtained at

https://www.transportation.gov/assistant-secretary-administration/procu....

(d) Department of Defense DD Form 882, Report of Inventions and Subcontracts. DD Form 882 can

be found at https://www.esd.whs.mil/Directives/forms/.

1253.227 Patents, data, and copyrights.

1253.227-3 Patent rights under Government contracts.

The following form is prescribed as a means for contractors to report inventions made during

contract performance, as specified in 1227.305–4: Department of Defense DD Form 882, Report of

Inventions and Subcontracts. DD Form 882 can be found at

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Directives/forms/.
§ 25.29 Reinstatement of access authorization. ( a ) An access authorization can be reinstated provided that: ( 1 ) No more than 24 months has lapsed since the date of termination of the clearance;
( 2 ) There has been no break in employment with the employer since the date of termination of the clearance;
( 3 ) There is no known adverse information;
( 4 ) The most recent investigation must not exceed 5 years (Top Secret, Q) or 10 years (Secret, L); and
( 5 ) The most recent investigation must meet or exceed the scope of the investigation required for the level of access authorization that is to be reinstated or granted.
( b ) An access authorization can be reinstated at the same, or lower, level by submission of a CSA-designated form to the CSA. The employee may not have access to classified information until receipt of written confirmation of reinstatement and an up-to-date personnel security packet will be furnished with the request for reinstatement of an access authorization. A new Security Acknowledgement will be obtained in all cases. Where personnel security packets are not required, a request for reinstatement must state the level of access authorization to be reinstated and the full name and date of birth of the individual to establish positive identification. A fee, equal to the amount paid for an initial request, will be charged only if a new or updating investigation by the NRC is required.
[62 FR 17689, Apr. 11, 1997]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

FARMERS TELECOMMUNICATIONS )

COOPERATIVE, INC., )

 )

Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06CV790-WC

 )

VERIZON BUSINESS NETWORK )

SERVICES INC., et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

ORDER ON MOTION

Upon consideration of Defendant and Crossclaim/Counterclaim Plaintiff Verizon

Business Network Services, Inc.’s Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice filed on October 9,

2007, (Doc. #56) on behalf of Sean A. Lev, Esq., and it appearing that he is a member in

good standing of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, it is 

ORDERED that the motion (Doc. #56) is GRANTED.

DONE this 9th day of October, 2007.

/s/ Wallace Capel, Jr.

WALLACE CAPEL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00790-WC Document 57 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 2:06-cv-00748-MEF-WC Document 35 Filed 03/20/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:06-cv-00748-MEF-WC Document 35 Filed 03/20/2007 Page 2 of 5
Case 2:06-cv-00748-MEF-WC Document 35 Filed 03/20/2007 Page 3 of 5
Case 2:06-cv-00748-MEF-WC Document 35 Filed 03/20/2007 Page 4 of 5
Case 2:06-cv-00748-MEF-WC Document 35 Filed 03/20/2007 Page 5 of 5
Editorial Note on Part 30
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 30 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 30.18 Exempt quantities. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) through (e) of this section, any person is exempt from the requirements for a license set forth in section 81 of the Act and from the regulations in parts 30 through 34, 36, and 39 of this chapter to the extent that such person receives, possesses, uses, transfers, owns, or acquires byproduct material in individual quantities, each of which does not exceed the applicable quantity set forth in § 30.71, Schedule B.
( b ) Any person, who possesses byproduct material received or acquired before September 25, 1971, under the general license then provided in § 31.4 of this chapter or similar general license of a State, is exempt from the requirements for a license set forth in section 81 of the Act and from the regulations in parts 30 through 34, 36 and 39 of this chapter to the extent that this person possesses, uses, transfers, or owns byproduct material.
( c ) This section does not authorize for purposes of commercial distribution the production, packaging, repackaging, or transfer of byproduct material or the incorporation of byproduct material into products intended for commercial distribution.
( d ) No person may, for purposes of commercial distribution, transfer byproduct material in the individual quantities set forth in § 30.71 Schedule B, knowing or having reason to believe that such quantities of byproduct material will be transferred to persons exempt under this section or equivalent regulations of an Agreement State, except in accordance with a license issued under § 32.18 of this chapter, which license states that the byproduct material may be transferred by the licensee to persons exempt under this section or the equivalent regulations of an Agreement State.
( e ) No person may, for purposes of producing an increased radiation level, combine quantities of byproduct material covered by this exemption so that the aggregate quantity exceeds the limits set forth in § 30.71, Schedule B, except for byproduct material combined within a device placed in use before May 3, 1999, or as otherwise permitted by the regulations in this part.
[35 FR 6427, Apr. 22, 1970, as amended at 36 FR 16898, Aug. 26, 1971; 43 FR 6921, Feb. 17, 1978; 52 FR 8241, Mar. 17, 1987; 58 FR 7736, Feb. 9, 1993; 72 FR 55925, Oct. 1, 2007; 72 FR 58486, Oct. 16, 2007]