alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 95.31 Protective personnel. Whenever protective personnel are used to protect classified information they shall: ( a ) Possess an “L” access authorization (or CSA equivalent) if the licensee, certificate holder, or other person possesses information classified Confidential National Security Information, Confidential Restricted Data or Secret National Security Information.
( b ) Possess a “Q” access authorization (or CSA equivalent) if the licensee, certificate holder, or other person possesses Secret Restricted Data related to nuclear weapons design, manufacturing and vulnerability information; and certain particularly sensitive Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program information (e.g., fuel manufacturing technology) and the protective personnel require access as part of their regular duties.
[72 FR 49562, Aug. 28, 2007]
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

259) ll-K- (I) -72 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:57 AM Sheet 259 of 325 
P.2 

II-K-(I)-72 

INFORMAL ANALYSIS WORKING GROUP. ENERGY SCENARIO 

COMPARISON; ENERGY SCENARIO RECOMMENDATIONS; ECONOMIC 

RETIREMENT COST COMPARISON; COMPARATIVE COST ANALYSIS 

OF DUAL-UNIT INDUSTRIAL BOILERS AND SINGLE-UNIT 

INDUSTRIAL BOILERS. 

EEA, Inc. 

January 22, 1981. 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

II-K-(I)-72
#### § 959.10 Grading.

*Grading* is synonymous with *preparation for market* and means the sorting or separation of onions into grades, sizes, and packs for market purposes.
Exhibit
      10.5 

    


    MIDDLE
      KINGDOM ALLIANCE CORPORATION

    


     [_____],
      2006 

    


    Primus
      Capital LLC

    333
      Sandy
      Springs Circle, Ste 223

    Atlanta,
      GA 30328

    


    Michael
      Marks 

    35125
      CITIC Square

    1168
      Nanjing Road West

    Shanghai,
      China 200041

    


    MTP
      Holdings Ltd.

    Room
      804,
      Hong Kong Plaza

    283
      Huaihai Zhong Road,

    Shanghai
      200021, P.R. China

    


    Allan
      Shu
      Cheuk Lam 

    82-9133
      Bayview Avenue

    Richmond
      Hill 

    Ontario
      L4B 4V6

    Canada

    


    Gentlemen:
      

    


     This
      letter will confirm our agreement that, commencing on the effective date
      (“Effective Date”) of the registration statement for the initial public offering
      (“IPO”) of the securities of Middle Kingdom Alliance Corporation (the “Company”)
      and continuing (i) until the consummation by the Company of a “Business
      Combination” (as described in the Company’s IPO prospectus), OR (ii) the later
      of (a) 18 months from commencement of the IPO if the Company does not
      effect a Business Combination, or (b) 24 months from the consummation of
      the IPO if a letter of intent, agreement in principle or definitive agreement
      has been executed within 18 months of commencement of the IPO and the Company
      has not effected a Business Combination, the above entities and individuals
      shall make available to the Company certain office and secretarial services
      as
      may be required by the Company from time to time. In exchange therefore, the
      Company shall allocate among Primus Capital LLC, Michael Marks, MTP Holdings
      LLC
      and Allan Lam the sum of $7,500 per month on the Effective Date and continuing
      monthly thereafter, as directed by the parties. 

    


     

    


    
      	 	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 	 
	 	 
	 	 	MIDDLE KINGDOM ALLIANCE
              CORP.
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	 	By:  	 
	 	
              
Michael
              Marks, President
	 	 


    

    


    


    
      
         

      

      
         

        
          

        

      

      
         

      

    

    


    AGREED
      TO
      AND ACCEPTED BY:

    


    


    
      

    

    PRIMUS
      CAPITAL, LLC

    By:
      Bernard J. Tanenbaum III, Chief Executive Officer 

    


    


    


    
      

    

    MICHAEL
      MARKS

    


    


    


     

      
        

      

    

    MTP
      HOLDINGS LTD.

    By:
      Alex
      Chun Yao, Director

    


    


    


    
      

    

    ALLAN
      SHU CHEUK LAM

    


    


    


     

    
      
         

      

      
        2
Editorial Note on Part 180
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 180 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 180.125 What is the purpose of the nonprocurement debarment and suspension system? ( a ) To protect the public interest, the Federal Government ensures the integrity of Federal programs by conducting business only with responsible persons.
( b ) A Federal agency uses the nonprocurement debarment and suspension system to exclude from Federal programs persons who are not presently responsible.
( c ) An exclusion is a serious action that a Federal agency may take only to protect the public interest. A Federal agency may not exclude a person or commodity for the purposes of punishment.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 63 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 63

Recognizing the cultural and historical significance of Lunar New Year 
                                in 2017.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 24, 2017

    Ms. Meng (for herself, Mr. Royce of California, Ms. Judy Chu of 
California, Mr. Takano, Mr. Al Green of Texas, Ms. Lee, Mr. Ted Lieu of 
  California, Mr. Grijalva, Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York, Mr. 
 McNerney, Mrs. Napolitano, Ms. Roybal-Allard, Mr. Schiff, Ms. Speier, 
   Mr. Vargas, Ms. Velazquez, Mrs. Watson Coleman, Mr. Conyers, Mr. 
     Peters, Ms. Hanabusa, Ms. Gabbard, Mr. Crowley, Mrs. Davis of 
    California, Ms. Titus, Ms. Lofgren, and Mr. Scott of Virginia) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                   on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Recognizing the cultural and historical significance of Lunar New Year 
                                in 2017.

Whereas Lunar New Year begins on the second new moon following the winter 
        solstice, or the first day of the new year according to the lunisolar 
        calendar, and extends until the full moon 15 days later;
Whereas the 15th day of the new year, according to the lunisolar calendar, is 
        called the Lantern Festival;
Whereas Lunar New Year is often referred to as Spring Festival in various Asian 
        countries;
Whereas many religious and ethnic communities use lunar-based calendars;
Whereas Lunar New Year began in China more than 4,000 years ago and is widely 
        celebrated in East and Southeast Asia;
Whereas the Asian diaspora has expanded the Lunar New Year celebration into an 
        annual worldwide event;
Whereas Lunar New Year is celebrated by millions of Asian Americans, and by many 
        non-Asian Americans, in the United States;
Whereas Lunar New Year is celebrated with community activities and cultural 
        performances;
Whereas participants celebrating Lunar New Year travel to spend the holiday 
        reuniting with family and friends; and
Whereas Lunar New Year is traditionally a time to wish upon others good fortune, 
        health, prosperity, and happiness: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the cultural and historical significance of 
        Lunar New Year;
            (2) in observance of this Lunar New Year, the Year of the 
        Rooster, expresses its deepest respect for Asian Americans and 
        all individuals throughout the world who celebrate this 
        significant occasion; and
            (3) wishes Asian Americans and all individuals who observe 
        this holiday a happy and prosperous new year.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-30603 Summary Calendar

VAUGHN HOWARD, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus JOHN P. WHITLEY, WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 92-CV-793-A

- - - - - - - - - - May 9, 1997 Before KING, JOLLY, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Vaughn Howard, Louisiana prisoner # 98700, has appealed the district court’s verdict for defendants-appellees Kevin Warren and Cheryl Honore after a bench trial. Howard’s contention that the district court should not have relied on standards stated in Farmer v. Brennan , 511 U.S. 825 (1994), to adjudicate his claim of deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs, has noNo. 96-30603 - 2 - merit. See Reeves v. Collins , 27 F.3d 174, 176 (5th Cir. 1994). As to this point, the district court’s judgment is hereby AFFIRMED. Howard also contends that the district court erred by rendering judgment for Warren and Honore, based on testimony which the district court rejected in favor of other testimony. To obtain relief, Howard would have to show that the district court’s findings are clearly erroneous. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a); Anderson v. City of Bessemer City , 470 U.S. 564, 575 (1985). The court cannot determine the merits of this claim because Howard did not include a transcript of Warren’s and Honore’s testimony in the appellate record. As to this claim, therefore, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. See Richardson v. Henry , 902 F.2d 414, 416 (5th Cir. 1990). AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**MAC R1204-0109062 Old Annapolis RoadColumbia, MD 21045Tel: 410 884 2000 Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Banc of America Merrill Lynch Commercial Mortgage Inc. 

Bank of America Tower

One Bryant Park

New York, New York 10036

 

 

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for Morgan Stanley Bank Of America Merrill Lynch Trust 2013-C8, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2013-C8

 

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of February 1, 2013 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2015 (the "Reporting Period"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

March 1, 2016

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 00-11243

_____________________

THOMAS W. RICE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

MELQUIADES R. MARTINEZ,

Secretary of the Department of

Housing and Urban Development,

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 95-CV-750

_________________________________________________________________

July 2, 2001

Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

After reviewing the briefs and considering the arguments made

by the parties, we are convinced that the district court committed

no reversible error and therefore affirm the judgment. See 5TH

CIR. R. 47.6.

A F F I R M E D .
#### Cludie S. BLOUNT, Appellant, v. Togo D. WEST, Jr., Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Appellee.

No. 97-947.

United States Court of Veterans Appeals.

Jan. 21, 1998.

*33Before NEBEKER, Chief Judge, and STEINBERG and GREENE, Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

The appellant appeals a February 20,1997, decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA or Board) denying an earlier effective date for the award of dependency and indemnity compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1318. On December 11, 1997, the appellant, through counsel, filed out-of-time a motion to supplement out-of-time the record on" appeal (ROA) with a Veterans’ Administration (now Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)) Form 21-6798d, dated January 10, 1968, and a VA rating sheet, dated June 9, 1942. The appellant states that both documents are part of the veteran’s claims file and that she first became aware of the possible relevance of the documents upon the filing of the Secretary’s brief on November 28, 1997. The appellant advises the Court that counsel for the Secretary opposes the motion, but the Secretary has not filed an opposition. On January 7, 1998, the Court ordered oral argument in the case, and it is scheduled for January 27,1998.

This Court is precluded by statute from including in the ROA any material that was not contained in the “record of proceedings before the Secretary and the Board.” 38 U.S.C. § 7252(b); *see Rogozinski v. Derwinski,*1 Vet.App. 19 (1990) (review in Court shall be on record of proceedings before Secretary and Board). Where “relevant” documents relating to an appellant’s claim were within the Secretary’s control (for example, records generated by VA or communications received by it) prior to the BVA decision on appeal and could reasonably have been expected to be part of the record before the Secretary and the Board, such documents are “in contemplation of law” constructively part of the record of those proceedings. *Simington v. Brown,*9 Vet.App. 334, 335 (1996) (per curiam order) (quoting *Bell v. Derwinski,*2 Vet.App. 611, 612-13 (1992) (per curiam order)); *see also Hulsey v. Principi,*3 Vet.App. 486, 487 (1992) (per curiam order). The Court thus holds that the two VA-generated, pre-BVA-decision records in question were, under *Simington*and *Bell,*both *supra,*constructively part of the record below in this ease.

On consideration of the foregoing, it is

ORDERED that the appellant’s motion to supplement the record with the two VA records is granted. It is further

ORDERED that the Secretary, within 5 days after the date of this order, file a Supplemental ROA containing certified copies of those VA records.
#### In the Matter of Abdul Hakim-Zaki, Appellant, v New York State Division of Parole, Respondent.

[814 NYS2d 414]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lamont, J.), entered August 26, 2005 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Board of Parole denying petitioner’s request for parole release.

Petitioner is serving a prison sentence of 20 years to life imposed upon his 1979 conviction of three counts of murder in the second degree for the stabbing death of a 71-year-old man who was confined to a wheelchair. In October 2004, petitioner made his fourth appearance before the Board of Parole and his request for parole release again was denied. Following an unsuccessful administrative appeal, petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding. Supreme Court dismissed the petition and this appeal ensued.

The record belies petitioner’s contention that the Board’s determination denying his request for parole release was predetermined. Rather, the parole hearing transcript and the Board’s determination establish that the relevant statutory factors were considered, including the nature of the crime, petitioner’s institutional achievements, disciplinary record and plans upon release *(see*Executive Law § 259-i [2] [c] [A]). Although the Board placed particular emphasis on the heinous nature of the crime, the Board was not required to give equal weight to each factor it considered in rendering the determination *(see Matter of Wood v Dennison,*25 AD3d 1056, 1057 [2006]; *Matter of Baez v Dennison,*25 AD3d 1052, 1052-1053 [2006]; *Matter of Rodney v Dennison,*24 AD3d 1152, 1153 [2005]). Inasmuch as the record establishes that the determination resulted from an exercise of the Board’s discretion upon consideration of all relevant statutory factors and there is no “ ‘showing of irrationality bordering on impropriety’ ” *(Matter of Silmon v Travis,*95 NY2d 470, 476 [2000], quoting *Matter of Russo v New York*
      *1191
      *State Bd. of Parole,*50 NY2d 69, 77 [1980]), the determination is not subject to further judicial review *(see*Executive Law § 259-i [5]; *Matter of Moore v Travis,*8 AD3d 717, 718 [2004]). Furthermore, we reject petitioner’s contention that the determination of the Board was premised upon an unwritten executive policy to deny violent felons release on parole *(see Matter of Rivera v Dennison,*25 AD3d 856, 857 [2006]; *Matter of Turner v Dennison,*24 AD3d 1074, 1075 [2005]). Petitioner’s remaining contentions, including that the Board failed to consider the recommendation of the sentencing court judge, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Mugglin and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
#### § 5800.930 Debarring official.

For the Commission, the debarring official for all nonprocurement transactions is the Commission's Contracting Officer. In the case of a vacancy in the position of the Contracting Officer, the alternate debarring official is the Chief Financial Officer.
§ 1128.305 Content of FMS Article III. ( a ) *Requirement.* A DoD Component's general terms and conditions must address allowability of costs and permissibility of fee or profit.
( b ) *Award terms and conditions.* A DoD Component's general terms and conditions must include the wording appendix C to this part provides for FMS Article III with appropriate reservations as described in §§ 1128.310 through 1128.325.
#### SACRED HEART ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, Appellant, v. VEDDER et al. Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

July 1, 1914.)

Action by the Sacred Heart Roman Catholic Church against Frederick Vedder and others.

No opinion. Motion to open default granted, and motion to dismiss appeal denied, on condition that within 30 days the appellant pay to the respondent $10 costs and serve the necessary printed papers, together with a stipulation consenting to the argument of the case at the next term of this court. See, also, 147 N. Y. Supp. 1139.
§ 770.2 What real property does this part cover? ( a ) DOE may transfer DOE-owned real property by sale or lease at closed or downsized defense nuclear facilities, for the purpose of permitting economic development.
( b ) DOE may transfer, by lease only, improvements at defense nuclear facilities on land withdrawn from the public domain, that are unneeded, temporarily underutilized, or underutilized, for the purpose of permitting economic development and for facilitating local reuse or redevelopment.
[65 FR 10689, Feb. 29, 2000, as amended at 78 FR 67927, Nov. 13, 2013]
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 826 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a National Youth 

Sports Week should be established. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 19, 2006 

Mr. MCINTYRE (for himself, Mr. HULSHOF, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Mr. KIND, Mr. 

PICKERING, Mr. CHANDLER, Mr. WAMP, Mr. TIAHRT, and Mr. BRADLEY

of New Hampshire) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

a National Youth Sports Week should be established. 

Whereas about 42 million children participate in organized 

sports each year; 

Whereas children participating in organized sports tend to 

perform better in school, develop excellent interpersonal 

skills, and lead healthier lives; 

Whereas organized youth sports help children increase their 

self-esteem, develop an appreciation of health and fitness, 

and become leaders within the community; 

Whereas organized youth sports provide for regular physical 

activity and help combat increasing rates of childhood 

obesity; 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 826 IH

Whereas the Congressional Caucus on Youth Sports was created, with great help and support from the Citizenship 

Through Sports Alliance, Positive Coaching Alliance, and 

National Recreation and Park Association, to restore the 

focus in youth sports on the child’s experience and character development; 

Whereas far too many children quit participating in youth 

sports at a young age, many telling coaches and parents, 

‘‘It just wasn’t fun anymore’’; 

Whereas the National Recreation and Park Association has 

designated July as Parks and Recreation Month; 

Whereas many youth sports organizations gather at local 

parks and recreation facilities across the country; and 

Whereas designating the second week in July as National 

Youth Sports Week would raise awareness of the important physical and emotional benefits of participating in 

youth sports and the need to promote sportsmanship 

among players, parents, coaches, and officials: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that a National Youth Sports Week should 

3 be established to promote awareness of the importance of 

4 youth sports and the need to restore the focus in youth 

5 sports on the child’s experience and character develop6 ment. 

Æ 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
#### WALTER FARRINGTON TILING CO., Respondent, v. HAZEN et al., Appellants.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

December 11, 1914.)

Action by the Walter Farrington Tiling Company against Frank C. Hazen and others.

PER CURIAM.

Motion to open the default granted, upon condition, first, that appellants pay to respondent $10 costs of the motion; second, that appellants, within two days, serve a copy of their brief upon respondent’s attorney if they have not already done so; third, that the case be placed at the foot of the present calendar, and appellants be ready for argument when reached. See, also, 150 N. Y. Supp. 1117.
§ 501.9 Effective date of orders or rules. ( a ) When OFE issues a rule or order imposing a prohibition or granting an exemption (or permit) under FUA, the rule or order will be effective sixty (60) days after publication in the Federal Register, unless it is stayed, modified, suspended or rescinded.
( b ) If the appropriate State regulatory authority has not approved a powerplant for which a petition has been filed, such exemption, to the extent it applies to the prohibition under section 201 of FUA against construction without the capability of using coal or another alternate fuel, shall not take effect until all approvals required by such State regulatory authority which relate to construction have been obtained.
[54 FR 52891, Dec. 22, 1989]
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 559 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 559

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                     November 17, 2005.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 3010) making 
appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and 
Education, and Related Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, 
and for other purposes. All points of order against the conference report and 
against its consideration are waived. The conference report shall be considered 
as read.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```