alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PGI 242.7303 Responsibilities.

(1) The ACO is responsible for—

(i) Determining the need for a CIPR in accordance with the procedures at DFARS 242.7302;

(ii) Requesting and scheduling the reviews with the appropriate DCMA activity;

(iii) Notifying the contractor of the proposed date and purpose of the review, and obtaining any

preliminary data needed by the DCMA insurance/pension specialist or the DCAA auditor;

(iv) Reviewing the CIPR report, advising the contractor of the recommendations contained within the

report, considering contractor comments, and rendering a decision based on those

recommendations;

(v) Providing other interested contracting officers copies of documents related to the CIPR;

(vi) Ensuring adequate follow-up on all CIPR recommendations; and

(vii) Performing contract administration responsibilities related to Cost Accounting Standards

administration as described in FAR Subparts 30.2 and 30.6.

(2) The DCMA insurance/pension specialist is responsible for—

(i) Issuing a technical report on the contractor’s insurance/pension plans for incorporation into the

final CIPR report based on an analysis of the contractor’s pension plans, insurance programs, and

other related data;

(ii) Leading the team that conducts the review. Another individual may serve as the team leader

when both the insurance/pension specialist and that individual agree. The team leader is responsible

for—

(A) Maintaining complete documentation for CIPR reports;

(B) To the extent possible, resolving discrepancies between audit reports and CIPR draft reports

prior to releasing the final CIPR report;

(C) Preparing and distributing the final CIPR report;

(D) Providing the final audit report and/or the insurance/pension specialist’s report as an attachment

to the CIPR report; and

(E) Preparing a draft letter for the administrative contracting officer's use in notifying the contractor

of CIPR results; and

(iii) When requested, advising administrative contracting officers and other Government

representatives concerning contractor insurance/pension matters.

(3) The DCAA auditor is responsible for—

(i) Participating as a member of the CIPR team or serving as the team leader (see paragraph (2)(ii)

of this section);
(ii) Issuing an audit report for incorporation into the final CIPR report based on an analysis of the

contractor’s books, accounting records, and other related data; and

(iii) Performing contract audit responsibilities related to Cost Accounting Standards administration

as described in FAR Subparts 30.2 and 30.6.

Parent topic: PGI 242.73 -CONTRACTOR INSURANCE/PENSION REVIEW
Order entered December 22, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-01042-CV

KENNETH CRAIG WELLS AND DUSTY WELLS, Appellants

V.

MARK CROWELL AND SUZON CROWELL, Appellees

On Appeal from the 397th Judicial District Court

Grayson County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CV-20-0760

ORDER

Before the Court is appellants’ December 17, 2020 unopposed motion for an

extension of time to file their brief on the merits. We GRANT the motion and 

extend the time to January 5, 2021.

/s/ ERIN A. NOWELL 

JUSTICE
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 4792

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. JAMES LEE WORKMAN , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia , at Elkins

. Thomas S. Kleeh , District Judge. ( 2:03

- cr - 00003

- TSK

- MJA

- 1 )

Submitted : April 30, 2020 Decided: June 2, 2020

Before KEENAN, HARRIS, and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Kristen M. Leddy, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellant. Stephen Donald Warner, Assistant United S tates Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: James Lee Workman appeals the district court’s order revoking his supervised release and imposing a 24

- month revocation sentence with no additional supervision to follow. Workman’s appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal. While this a ppeal was pending, Workman was released from federal custody. “When a case or controversy ceases to exist

— either due to a change in the facts or the law

— the litigation is moot, and the court’s subject matter jurisdiction ceases to exist also.” Porter v. Clarke , 852 F.3d 358, 363 (4th Cir. 2017) (internal quotation marks omitted). “Because mootness is jurisdictional, we can and must consider it even if neither party has raised it.” United States v. Ketter , 908 F.3d 61, 65 (4th Cir. 2018). Workman
has a lready served his sentence , faces no further term of supervised release , and suggests no other collateral consequences sufficient to meet the case or controversy requirement ; thus, there is no longer a live controversy. Workman’s challenge to the revocatio n of his supervised release and revocation sentence is therefore moot

. See United States v. Hardy , 545 F.3d 280, 284 (4th Cir. 2008)

. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal c ontentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM BNP
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, INC. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS
ENDED MARCH 31, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         854,404
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,695,012
<PP&E>                                     244,372,686
<DEPRECIATION>                             (27,695,689)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             222,882,710
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,890,094
<BONDS>                                    150,677,089
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    69,764,224
<OTHER-SE>                                 (21,200,899)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               222,822,710
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,480,489
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,050,149
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               785,547
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,746,718
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                690,789
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            690,789
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   690,789
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1998
<CASH>                                       2,984,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               16,648,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   602,000
<INVENTORY>                                 19,888,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            43,770,000
<PP&E>                                      43,223,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              25,811,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              83,755,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       37,894,000
<BONDS>                                      3,685,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          1
<COMMON>                                     2,146,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  40,029,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                83,755,000
<SALES>                                     25,548,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            25,548,000
<CGS>                                       16,719,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,166,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               341,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             341,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,678,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,678,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,678,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 68 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                      February 8, 2005.
    Resolved, That the following Member be, and is hereby, elected to the 
following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on the Budget: Mr. Simpson to rank after Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
Editorial Note on Part 72
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 72 appear at 80 FR 74981, Dec. 1, 2015, and at 81 FR 86910, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 72.84 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 55078, Nov. 24, 1992]
#### § 707.11 Drugs for which testing is performed.

Where testing is performed under this part, at a minimum, contractors will be required to test for the use of the following drugs or classes of drugs: marijuana; cocaine; opiates; phencyclidine; and amphetamines. However, when conducting reasonable suspicion or occurrence testing, the contractor may test for any drug listed in Schedules I or II of the Controlled Substances Act.
#### §§ 503.39-503.44 [Reserved]
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 92 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 92

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the maximum age for 
     children eligible for medical care under the CHAMPVA program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2017

 Ms. Brownley of California (for herself and Mr. Walz) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the maximum age for 
     children eligible for medical care under the CHAMPVA program.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``CHAMPVA Children's Protection Act of 
2017''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE OF MAXIMUM AGE FOR CHILDREN ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICAL CARE 
              UNDER CHAMPVA PROGRAM.

    (a) Increase.--Section 1781(c) of title 38, United States Code, is 
amended--
            (1) by striking ``twenty-three'' and inserting ``twenty-
        six''; and
            (2) by striking ``twenty-third birthday'' and inserting 
        ``twenty-sixth birthday''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to medical care provided on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
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 Annual Report of Global Tech Solutions, Inc. (the "Registrant") on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2013, as filed with the Commission on the date hereof (the "Annual Report"), I, Kenneth Johnson, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1) The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.





Dated:  February 13, 2014





/s/ Kenneth Johnson


_______________________________


Kenneth Johnson


Principal Executive Officer


Principal Financial Officer
§ 900.11 NEPA lead agency and selection of NEPA joint lead agency. ( a ) For a proposed electric transmission project that is accepted for the Integrated Interagency Pre-Application (IIP) Process under § 900.5, DOE shall serve as the NEPA lead agency to prepare an environmental review document to serve the needs of all relevant Federal entities. A NEPA joint lead agency to prepare the environmental review document may also be designated pursuant to this section, no later than by the IIP Process review meeting.
( b ) The NEPA joint lead agency, if any, shall be the Federal entity with the most significant interest in the management of Federal lands or waters that would be traversed or affected by the proposed project. DOE shall make this determination in consultation with all Federal entities that manage Federal lands or waters traversed or affected by the proposed project. For a proposed project that would traverse lands managed by both the USDA and the DOI, DOE will request that USDA and DOI determine the appropriate NEPA joint lead agency, if any.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

BRIAN KEITH BENNER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 263 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 15th day of October, 2020

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
§ 590.108 Off-the-record communications. ( a ) In any contested proceeding under this part: ( 1 ) No interested person shall make an off-the-record communication or knowingly cause an off-the-record communication to be made to any decisional employee.
( 2 ) No decisional employee shall make an off-the-record communication or knowingly cause an off-the-record communication to be made to any interested person.
( 3 ) A decisional employee who receives, makes, or knowingly causes to be made an oral off-the-record communication prohibited by this section shall prepare a memorandum stating the substance of the communication and any responses made to it.
( 4 ) Within forty-eight (48) hours of the off-the-record communication, a copy of all written off-the-record communications or memoranda prepared in compliance with paragraph (a)(3) of this section shall be delivered by the decisional employee to the Assistant Secretary and to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fuels Programs. The materials will then be made available for public inspection by placing them in the docket associated with the proceeding.
( 5 ) Requests by a party for an opportunity to rebut, on the record, any facts or contentions in an off-the-record communication may be filed in writing with the Assistant Secretary. The Assistant Secretary shall grant such requests only for good cause.
( 6 ) Upon being notified of an off-the-record communication made by a party in violation of this section, the Assistant Secretary may, to the extent consistent with the interests of justice and the policies of the NGA and the DOE Act, require the party to show cause why the party's claim or interest in the proceeding should not be dismissed, denied, disregarded, or otherwise adversely affected on account of the violation.
( b ) The prohibitions of paragraph (a) of the section shall apply only to contested proceedings and begin at the time either a protest or a motion to intervene or notice of intervention in opposition to the application or other requested action is filed with FE, or a party otherwise specifically notifies the Assistant Secretary and the other parties in writing of its opposition to the application or other requested action, whichever occurs first.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 855 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 855

To amend title 31, United States Code, to require the Secretary of the 
  Treasury to provide for the purchase of paper United States savings 
                        bonds with tax refunds.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 3, 2017

Mr. Cartwright (for himself, Mr. Cummings, Mr. Ellison, Ms. Jenkins of 
   Kansas, Mr. Neal, Ms. Tsongas, Mr. Lipinski, and Ms. Schakowsky) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 31, United States Code, to require the Secretary of the 
  Treasury to provide for the purchase of paper United States savings 
                        bonds with tax refunds.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Save Access to a Valuable Investment 
Needed to Generate Savings Act of 2017'' or the ``SAVINGS Act''.

SEC. 2. PURCHASE PAPER UNITED STATES SAVINGS BONDS WITH TAX REFUND.

    Section 3106 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(d) The Secretary shall--
            ``(1) provide an option on the individual return of tax 
        under subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to use a 
        portion or all of a refund of overpayment of such tax to 
        purchase United States savings bonds in paper form for the 
        taxpayer or any individual designated by the taxpayer; or
            ``(2) provide an option on such return of tax that--
                    ``(A) allows for the gifting of United States 
                savings bonds to any individual designated by the 
                taxpayer; and
                    ``(B) serves the unbanked (within the meaning of 
                section 49 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 
                U.S.C. 1831z)) and individuals who lack access to the 
                Internet.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 780.6 Department participation.

The Department shall be a party to all proceedings under this part, and the Office of the General Counsel will represent the Department's interests before the Board.
NO. 07-07-0021-CV IN THE COUR

T OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVEN TH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO PANEL B FEBRUARY

27, 2007

______________________________ In th e Ma tter

of th e Ma rri age of MARY CECELIA GARZA and RAYMOND M. GARZA

_________________________________ FROM THE 3 20th DIS TRICT CO URT OF POT TER COUNT Y; NO. 73,011-D; HON. DON EMERSON, PRESIDING

________________________________ MEMORAN

DUM OPINI

ON

___________________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Appellant

Raym o nd M. Garz a filed a notice o f appeal on January 22, 2007. However, he did not

pay the $125 fil ing fee requi red from appellants under Texas R ule of Appellate Procedure 5. Nor did he file an affid avit of indigence per Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 20.1. By l etter from this C ourt dated February 7, 2007, we i nformed appellant that “the filing fee in the amount of $125.00 has not been paid, and appel lantis direct ed this fee must be receiv ed by the Cour t no later than Tuesday, Febr uary 20, 2007.

. . . Failure to comply w ith the Court ’s directi ve wi ll result in dismiss al of

the appeal per

Rules 37.3(b) and 42.3(b) and (c).” T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 42.3(c); see Holt v. F. F. En terprises , 990 S.W.2d 756 (Tex. App. –Amarillo 1998, pet. ref’d). The deadline lapsed, and the fee was not receiv ed.2

Because appe llan t fa iled to pa y the re quisi te f iling fee as dir ecte d by th e cou rt, we dismiss the app eal pursuant to Texas Rule of Appe llate Procedur e 42.3(c).
Per Curiam
Editorial Note on Part 70
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 70 appear at 81 FR 86910, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 70.31 Issuance of licenses. ( a ) Upon a determination that an application meets the requirements of the act and of the regulations of the Commission, the Commission will issue a license in such form and containing such conditions and limitations as it deems appropriate or necessary to effectuate the purposes of the act.
( b ) [Reserved]
( c ) Each license issued to a person for use of special nuclear material in activities in which special nuclear material will be produced shall (subject to the provisions of § 70.41(b)) be deemed to authorize such person to receive title to, own, acquire, receive, possess, use, and transfer the special nuclear material produced in the course of such authorized activities.
( d ) No license will be issued by the Commission to any person within the United States if the Commission finds that the issuance of such license would be inimical to the common defense and security or would constitute an unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public.
( e ) No license to construct and operate a uranium enrichment facility may be issued until a hearing pursuant to 10 CFR part 2, subparts G and I, is completed and decision issued on the application.
[21 FR 764, Feb. 3, 1956, as amended at 32 FR 2563, Feb. 7, 1967; 32 FR 4056, Mar. 15, 1967; 43 FR 6925, Feb. 17, 1978; 57 FR 18393, Apr. 30, 1992]