alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
PGI 242.7502 Policy.       (d)  *Disposition of findings*.          (2)  *Initial determination*.          (ii)(A)  Within 10 days of receiving the report, if the contracting officer makes a determination that there is a significant deficiency, the contracting officer should provide an initial determination of deficiencies and a copy of the report to the contractor and require the contractor to submit a written response.          (C)  *Evaluation of contractor's response*.  Within 30 days of receiving the contractor’s response, the contracting officer, in consultation with the auditor or cognizant functional specialist, should evaluate the contractor’s response and make a final determination.          (3)  *Final Determination*.          (ii)(A)  *Monitoring contractor's corrective action*.  The auditor and the contracting officer shall monitor the contractor's progress in correcting deficiencies.  If the contractor fails to make adequate progress, the contracting officer shall take whatever action is necessary to ensure that the contractor corrects the deficiencies.  Examples of actions the contracting officer can take are:  disapproving the system; bringing the issue to the attention of higher level management; implementing or increasing the withholding in accordance with 252.242-7005, Contractor Business Systems, if applicable; and recommending non-award of potential contracts.          (B)  *Correction of significant deficiencies*.          (*1*)  When the contractor notifies the contracting officer that the contractor has corrected the significant deficiencies, the contracting officer shall request that the auditor review the correction to determine if the deficiencies have been resolved.          (*2*)  The contracting officer shall determine if the contractor has corrected the deficiencies.          (*3*)  If the contracting officer determines the contractor has corrected the deficiencies, the contracting officer's notification shall be sent to the auditor; payment office; appropriate action officers responsible for reporting past performance at the requiring activities; and each contracting and contract administration office having substantial business with the contractor as applicable.          (g)  Mitigating the risk of accounting system deficiencies on specific proposals.          (2)  In the event that a contractor’s accounting system contains deficiencies, even if it has been disapproved, a cost reimbursement contract is not prohibited if the contracting officer determines that the contractor’s accounting system is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract or order.    **Parent topic:** PGI 242.75 -CONTRACTOR ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS AND RELATED CONTROLS
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Brian E. Schaaf, certify that:

 

1.                                    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Ford Credit Auto Owner Trust 2013-A (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);

 

2.                                    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.                                    Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

 

4.                                    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer and based on my knowledge and the compliance review conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and

 

5.                                    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

 

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: The Bank of New York Mellon, as indenture trustee of the issuing entity, and U.S. Bank Trust National Association, as owner trustee of the issuing entity.

 

Dated March 21, 2014

 
|   | /s/   Brian E. Schaaf                              |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|
|   | Brian   E. Schaaf                                  |
|   | Vice   President and Assistant Treasurer           |
|   | Ford   Motor Credit Company LLC, as Servicer       |
|   | (senior   officer in charge of servicing function) |

 

----
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 629 

Supporting the goals and ideals of a Day of Hearts, Congenital Heart Defect 

Day in order to increase awareness about congenital heart defects, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 16, 2005 

Mr. PRICE of Georgia (for himself, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. GINGREY, Mr. 

DEAL of Georgia, Mr. NORWOOD, Mr. SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. LEWIS of 

Georgia, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Mr. BARROW, Mr. 

KINGSTON, and Mr. LINDER) submitted the following resolution; which 

was referred to the Committee on Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of a Day of Hearts, Congenital Heart Defect Day in order to increase awareness 

about congenital heart defects, and for other purposes. 

Whereas congenital heart defects are structural problems 

with the heart that are present at birth; 

Whereas such defects range in severity from simple problems, 

such as ‘‘holes’’ between chambers of the heart, to very 

severe malformations, such as the complete absence of 

one or more chambers or valves of the heart; 

Whereas more than one million Americans have some form of 

a congenital heart defect and such defect is the number 

one cause of death in infants; 
2 

•HRES 629 IH 

Whereas out of 1000 births, eight babies will have some form 

of a congenital heart disorder, and approximately 35,000 

babies are born with such defects each year; 

Whereas twice as many children die each year from congenital heart disease compared with childhood cancers, 

yet funding for pediatric cancer research is five times 

higher than such funding for congenital heart disease; 

Whereas cardiovascular disease is the Nation’s leading killer 

in both men and women among all racial and ethnic 

groups; 

Whereas the United States has a severe shortage of cardiac 

centers that are fully equipped to provide care for adults 

living with complex heart defects; 

Whereas almost one million Americans die of cardiovascular 

disease each year, resulting in up to 42 percent of all 

deaths in the United States; 

Whereas the presence of a serious congenital heart defect 

often results in an enormous emotional and financial 

strain on young families who are already in a vulnerable 

stage of their lives; 

Whereas severe congenital heart disease requires that families 

dedicate extensive financial resources for assistance and 

care both within and outside of a hospital environment; 

Whereas congenial heart defects exceed more than $2.2 million a year for inpatient surgery alone; and 

Whereas February 14, 2006, would be an appropriate day to 

recognize A Day for Hearts: Congenital Heart Defect 

Awareness Day: Now, therefore, be it 
3 

•HRES 629 IH 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports 

2 the goals and ideals of A Day of Hearts: Congenital Heart 

3 Defect Awareness Day to— 

4 (1) increase awareness about congenital heart 

5 defects; 

6 (2) encourage research with respect to the dis7 ease; and 

8 (3) support the millions of Americans who are 

9 affected by this disease. 

Æ
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NOS. PD-1236-14, PD-1237-14, PD-1238-14

THOMAS LEE NIX, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

FROM THE FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

COLLIN COUNTY

PER CURIAM. KEASLER AND HERVEY, JJ., DISSENT.

O P I N I O N

The petition for discretionary review violates Rules of Appellate Procedure

9.4(i)(2)(D) and 68.4(j) because it does not contain a certificate of compliance and a copy of

the opinion of the court of appeals.

The petition is struck. See Rule of Appellate Procedure 68.6.

The petitioner may redraw the petition. The redrawn petition and copies must be filed

in the Court of Criminal Appeals within thirty days after the date of this order.

Filed January 28, 2015

Do not publish
#### § 95.59 Inspections.

The Commission shall make inspections and reviews of the premises, activities, records and procedures of any licensee, certificate holder, or other person subject to the regulations in this part as the Commission and CSA deem necessary to effect the purposes of the Act, E.O. 13526, as amended, or any predecessor or successor order, and/or NRC rules.

[75 FR 73945, Nov. 30, 2010]
`[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 588 Reported in House (RH)]







                                                 House Calendar No. 128
109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 588

                          [Report No. 109-330]

  Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4297) to provide for 
reconciliation pursuant to section 201(b) of the concurrent resolution 
                  on the budget for fiscal year 2006.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 7, 2005

    Mr. Putnam, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
  Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4297) to provide for 
reconciliation pursuant to section 201(b) of the concurrent resolution 
                  on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the 
House the bill (H.R. 4297) to provide for reconciliation pursuant to 
section 201(b) of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal 
year 2006. The bill shall be considered as read. The amendment in the 
nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Ways and Means 
now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. The previous 
question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to 
final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate 
on the bill, as amended, equally divided and controlled by the chairman 
and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means; (2) the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the report of the 
Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, if offered by 
Representative Rangel of New York or his designee, which shall be in 
order without intervention of any point of order, shall be considered 
as read, and shall be separately debatable for one hour equally divided 
and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (3) one motion to 
recommit with or without instructions.
                                                 House Calendar No. 128

109th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 588

                          [Report No. 109-330]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

  Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4297) to provide for 
reconciliation pursuant to section 201(b) of the concurrent resolution 
                  on the budget for fiscal year 2006.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            December 7, 2005

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed`
§ 780.53 Criteria for decisions for royalties, awards and compensation. ( a ) In deciding a reasonable royalty fee for a patent licensed under section 158 or sections 153b or 153e of the Act, the Board shall consider: ( 1 ) The economic value of the compulsory license and the Board shall strive to provide adequate remuneration for the circumstances of each case.
( 2 ) Any defense, general or special, that a defendant could plead in an action for infringement;
( 3 ) The extent to which such patent was developed through federally financed research or with other Federal support;
( 4 ) The degree of utility, novelty, and importance of the invention or discovery; and
( 5 ) The cost to the owner of the patent of developing such invention or discovery or of acquiring such patent.
( b ) In deciding whether or not to grant an award, under section 157 of the Act, for the making of an invention or discovery useful in the production or utilization of special nuclear material or atomic energy, the Board shall take into account the considerations set forth in § 780.53(a) of this part and the actual use of such invention or discovery.
( c ) In deciding whether or not to provide compensation, pursuant to section 173 of the Act, to a person who owns a patent application that contains restricted data not belonging to the United States which the Department has communicated to a foreign nation, the Board shall take into account the considerations set forth in § 780.53(b) of this part and the damage to the applicant resulting from such communication.
( d ) In the course of its review of an application to provide compensation, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 183, to an applicant whose patent was withheld because of a secrecy order issued at the request of the Department, the Board shall take into account the considerations set forth in § 780.53(b) of this part and: ( 1 ) The damage sustained by the applicant as a result of the secrecy order; and
( 2 ) The use of the invention by the Government resulting from the disclosure of such invention to the Department.
[46 FR 39581, Aug. 4, 1981, as amended at 58 FR 68735, Dec. 29, 1993]
# Subpart 804.1 [Reserved]

**Parent topic:**PART 804 - ADMINISTRATIVE AND INFORMATION MATTERS
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A19A2049. DAVID L. HARPER v. THE STATE.

A jury convicted David L. Harper of two counts of criminal trespass. The

Supreme Court affirmed Harper’s convictions, State v. Harper, 303 Ga. 144 (810

SE2d 484) (2018), and we issued the remittitur on June 29, 20181. See Case No.

A16A1008. On November 8, 2018, Harper filed a motion to vacate void sentence, 

arguing that, as a bail recovery agent, he could not be prosecuted for criminal

trespass. The trial court denied the motion and Harper filed this direct appeal. We,

however, lack jurisdiction.

Under OCGA § 17-10-1 (f), a court may modify a sentence during the year

after its imposition or within 120 days after remittitur following a direct appeal,

whichever is later. Frazier v. State, 302 Ga. App. 346, 348 (691 SE2d 247) (2010). 

Once, as here, this statutory period expires, a trial court may only modify a void

sentence. Id. And a direct appeal may lie from an order denying a motion to vacate

or correct a void sentence only if the defendant raises a colorable claim that the

sentence is, in fact, void. See Burg v. State, 297 Ga. App. 118, 119 (676 SE2d 465)

(2009). When a sentence is within the statutory range of punishment, it is not void. 

Jones v. State, 278 Ga. 669, 670 (604 SE2d 483) (2004). 

Here, Harper does not argue that his sentence falls outside the permissible

1

 We originally vacated one of Harper’s criminal trespass convictions, see 

Harper v. State, 338 Ga. App. 535, 538-539 (2) (790 SE2d 552) (2016), but the

Supreme Court reversed our judgment, holding that the evidence was sufficient to

support a finding of guilt. See Harper, 303 Ga. at 147.

July 15, 2019
statutory range, but instead argues that his entry was not subject to criminal

prosecution. The Supreme Court has made clear that a motion seeking to challenge

an allegedly invalid or void judgment of conviction “is not one of the established

procedures for challenging the validity of a judgment in a criminal case” and that an

appeal from the denial of such a motion is subject to dismissal. Roberts v. State, 286

Ga. 532, 532 (690 SE2d 150) (2010). Thus, Harper is not authorized to collaterally

attack his conviction in this manner. See id.; Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216, 218 (1),

(2) (686 SE2d 786) (2009); Matherlee v. State, 303 Ga. App. 765, 766 (694 SE2d

665) (2010).

Accordingly, this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

07/15/2019
§ 904.10 Excess energy. ( a ) If excess Energy is determined by the United States to be available, it shall be made available to the Contractors, in accordance with the priority entitlement of section 105(a)(1)(C) of the Hoover Power Plant Act (43 U.S.C. 619(a)(1)(c)). After the annual first- and second-priority entitlement to excess energy has been obligated for delivery, Western will make available one-third of the third-priority excess energy to the Arizona Power Authority, one-third to the Colorado River Commission of Nevada, and one-third to the California Contractors.
( b ) Western will make available third-priority excess energy to the California Contractors based on the following formula: F = 1 ⁄ 2 (A/B + C/D) (E); Where: A = Contractor's allocated Capacity B = Total California allocated Capacity C = Contractor's allocated Firm Energy D = Total California allocated Firm Energy E = Third-priority Excess Energy available to California F = Contractor's third-priority Excess Energy
( c ) The charge for all Excess Energy shall be the charge for Boulder Canyon Project Firm Energy existing at the time the Excess Energy is made available to the Contractor, including the appropriate Lower Basin Development Fund Contribution Charge.
Exhibit 13.1








CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Kamada Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, David Tsur, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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:   March 26, 2014


/s/ David Tsur

David Tsur

Chief Executive Officer


In connection with the Annual Report of Kamada Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Gil Efron, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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:   March 26, 2014


/s/ Gil Efron

Gil Efron

Chief Financial Officer
#### § 782.8 Indirect notice of infringement.

If a patent or copyright owner communicates an allegation of infringement in the performance of a Government contract, grant, or other arrangement to addressees other than those specified in § 782.5(a), such as Department of Energy contractors including contractors operating government-owned facilities, the communication shall not be considered a claim within the meaning of § 782.5 until it meets the requirements of that section.
#### § 624.102-4 Disputes.

The following clause shall be used in accordance with the provisions of § 622.103:

Disputes

( a ) This contract is subject to the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (41 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.*). If a dispute arises relating to the contract, the purchaser may submit a claim to the Contracting Officer who shall issue a written decision on the dispute.

( b ) *Claim* means: ( 1 ) A written request submitted to the Contracting Officer;
( 2 ) For payment of money, adjustment of contract terms, or other relief;
( 3 ) Which is in dispute or remains unresolved after a reasonable time for its review and disposition by the Government; and
( 4 ) For which a Contracting Officer's decision is demanded.

( c ) In the case of disputed requests or amendments to such requests for payment exceeding $50,000, or with any amendment causing the total request in dispute to exceed $50,000, the purchaser shall certify, at the time of submission of a claim, as follows: I certify that the claim is made in good faith, that the supporting data is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that the amount requested accurately reflects the contract adjustment for which the Purchaser believes the Government is liable. (Purchaser's Name) (Title)

( d ) The Government shall pay the Purchaser interest. ( 1 ) On the amount found due to the purchaser and unpaid on claims submitted under this clause;
( 2 ) At the rates fixed by the Secretary of the Treasury;
( 3 ) From the date the amount is due until the Government makes payment.

( e ) The purchaser shall pay the Government interest: ( 1 ) On the amount found due to the Government and unpaid on claims submitted under this clause;
( 2 ) At the rates fixed by the Department of Energy for the payment of interest on past due accounts;
( 3 ) From the date the amount is due until the purchaser makes payment.

( f ) The decision of the Contracting Officer shall be final and conclusive and not subject to review by any forum, tribunal, or Government agency unless an appeal or action is timely commenced within the times specified by the Contract Disputes Act of 1978.

( g ) The purchaser shall comply with any decision of the Contracting Officer and at the direction of the Contracting Officer shall proceed diligently with performance of this contract pending final resolution of any request for relief, claim, appeal, or action related to this contract.

(Sec. 644, Department of Energy Organization Act, Pub. L. 95-91, 91 Stat. 599 (42 U.S.C. 7254))