alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 700.6 Metric system of measurement. ( a ) The Metric Conversion Act, as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act (15 U.S.C. 205) declares that the metric system is the preferred measurement system for U.S. trade and commerce.
( b ) Wherever measurements are required or authorized, they must be made, computed, and recorded in metric system units of measurement, unless otherwise authorized by the Agreement Officer in writing when it has been found that such usage is impractical or is likely to cause U.S. firms to experience significant inefficiencies or the loss of markets. Where the metric system is not the predominant standard for a particular application, measurements may be expressed in both the metric and the traditional equivalent units, provided the metric units are listed first.
Exhibit 4.26


 


AGREEMENT


 


Pursuant to the Second Amended and Restated Series 2004-4
Supplement, dated as of April 13, 2006 (as amended to date, the “Series 2004-4
Supplement”), by and between ARG Funding Corp. (“ARG”) and The Bank of New
York, as Trustee (“Trustee”) supplementing the Fourth Amended and Restated Base
Indenture, dated as of April 13, 2006 (the “ARG Base Indenture”), by and
between ARG and the Trustee, each of the undersigned agree that effective as of
the date hereof the “Series 2004-4 Maximum Non-Program Vehicle Percentage”
shall be increased from 15% to 30%.


 


Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein are used herein
as defined in the Series 2004-4 Supplement.


 


This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each
of which so executed shall be deemed an original, but all of such counterparts
shall together constitute but one and the same instrument.


 

















 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned have caused this Agreement
to be executed by their respective officers thereunto duly authorized as of the
day and year written below.


 


 


	
   

  	
  ARG
  FUNDING CORP., a special purpose,

    Delaware corporation

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ PHILIP A. MARTONE

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
  Philip A. Martone

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
  Vice President

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  ASSURED
  GUARANTY CORP.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Dated: July 24, 2006

  	
   

  
								



 

















 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned have caused this Agreement
to be executed by their respective officers thereunto duly authorized as of the
day and year written below.


 


 


	
   

  	
  ARG
  FUNDING CORP., a special purpose,

    Delaware corporation

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  ASSURED
  GUARANTY CORP.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ ANDREW H. PICKERING

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
  Andrew
  H. Pickering

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Title:

  	
  Chief
  Surveillance Officer 

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Dated: July 24, 2006
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-18-0000709

21-JUN-2019

07:54 AM
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Vincent Zanfordino, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, rendered June 22, 1979, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and assault in the second degree, upon a *559jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and new trial ordered. The complaining witness testified on direct examination that she had been shown a photographic array by a police officer and had failed to select any of the photographs contained therein. We have previously held that such hearsay testimony both improperly bolsters the complainant’s in-court identification of the defendant and wrongly suggests that the complainant subsequently identified a photograph of the defendant *(People v Rothaar,*75 AD2d 652). Moreover, another witness testified to the complainant’s prior identification of the defendant in a dry cleaning establishment some months after the crime. This testimony also served to bolster the complainant’s in-court identification of the defendant in violation of the principles of *People v Trowbridge*(305 NY 471). The error was magnified when the prosecutor elicited testimony from this witness describing the complainant’s extreme physical reaction upon seeing the defendant (see *People v Dolphin,*77 AD2d 571). Because we cannot say that "the evidence of identity is so strong that there is no serious issue upon the point” (see *People v Caserta,*19 NY2d 18, 21), the defendant must have a new trial. We have examined defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins and Mangano, JJ., concur; Cohalan, J., dissents and votes to affirm the judgment.
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9765-9766]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3848]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Office of Science, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Advanced Scientific 
Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC). The Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these 
meetings be announced in the Federal Register.

DATES: Tuesday, March 22, 2011--9 a.m.-5 p.m. and Wednesday, March 23, 
2011--9 a.m.-12 p.m.

ADDRESSES: American Geophysical Union (AGU), 2000 Florida Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20009-1277.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melea Baker, Office of Advanced 
Scientific Computing Research, SC-21/Germantown Building, U.S. 
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.; Washington, DC 
20585-1290; Telephone (301) 903-7486.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of this meeting is to provide 
advice on a continuing basis to the Department of Energy on scientific 
priorities within the field of advanced scientific computing research.

Tentative Agenda Topics

     Advanced Scientific Computing Research program updates.
     ARRA update.
     Technical talks on exascale relevant research.
     ASCAC Committee of Visitors (COV) update and new business.
     Public Comment (10-minute rule).

    Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. A webcast 
of this meeting may be available. Please check the ASCAC Web site below 
for updates and information on how to view the meeting. If you would 
like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so 
either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral 
statements regarding any of the items on the agenda, you should contact 
Melea Baker at (301) 903-7486 or e-mail: Melea.Baker@science.doe.gov. 
You must make your request for an oral statement at least 5 business 
days prior to the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include 
the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of the 
Committee will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of 
business. Public

[[Page 9766]]

comment will follow the 10-minute rule.
    Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for viewing 
on the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Advanced Scientific 
Computing Web site at: http://www.er.doe.gov/ascr/ASCAC/ASCAC.html.

    Issued at Washington, DC on February 15, 2011.
LaTanya Butler,
Acting Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011-3848 Filed 2-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE>      5 
<LEGEND>       THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
               FROM THE ACCOMPANYING FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN
               ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000 

       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                           JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                             SEP-28-1997
<CASH>                                       45,308
<SECURITIES>                                 24,400
<RECEIVABLES>                                63,281
<ALLOWANCES>                                  3,104
<INVENTORY>                                  74,604
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            244,420
<PP&E>                                    1,077,634
<DEPRECIATION>                              403,204
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              958,914
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        68,966
<BONDS>                                     145,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                        525
<OTHER-SE>                                  682,235
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                958,914
<SALES>                                     129,694
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            129,694
<CGS>                                       129,492
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               129,492
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             17,031
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (843)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            2,541
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (69,291)
<INCOME-TAX>                                (20,411)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (52,748)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                (52,748)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                ($1.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                ($1.01)

         

</TABLE>
Biomass Program Home | EERE Home | U.S. Department of Energy

Webmaster | Web Site Policies | Security & Privacy | USA.gov 

Content Last Updated: 05/05/2008 

 

Search Help More Search Options 

Printable Version 

Processing and Conversion 

The Office of the Biomass Program focuses its research and development efforts in 

converting biomass into fuels, products, and power via two biochemical and thermochemical routes. 

Biochemical Conversion - Biomass is broken down to sugars using either enzymatic or chemical 

processes and then converted to ethanol via fermentation. 

Thermochemical Conversion - Biomass is broken down to intermediates using heat and upgraded to fuels 

using a combination of heat and pressure in the presence of catalysts. 

These R&D efforts focus on technologies and processes that can reduce the cost and increase the efficiency 

of producing biofuels, products, and power. Efficiencies can be achieved through methods for increasing the 

yields derived from conversion of various feedstocks, among other improvements. The majority of the 

Biomass Program's R&D is focused on these technologies. Current R&D projects are described in detail in 

this website's Information Resources section. 

Biochemical Related Links

Thermochemical Related Links

Printable Version 

Site Map 

EERE Information Center 

Programs and Offices 

Quick Links 

z

z

z

z

z

z

Biomass FAQs

Program Overview

Program Research

Financial 

Opportunities

Publications

Contact Us

Biomass Program: Processing and Conversion Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\jbrown19\Desktop\New Folder (2)\Biomass Program Pro... 7/16/2010
§ 910.366 Export Control and U.S. Manufacturing and Competitiveness. ( a ) *Export Control.* Any recipient of any award for research, development and/or demonstration must comply with all applicable U.S. laws regarding export control.
( b ) *U.S. Manufacturing and Competitiveness.* It is the policy of DOE to ensure that DOE-funded research, development, and/or demonstration projects foster domestic manufacturing. Funding opportunity announcements (FOAs), therefore, may require that applicants submit a “U.S. Manufacturing Plan” in their applications. Such FOAs may encourage U.S. Manufacturing Plans to include proposals by recipients and any sub-recipients to manufacture DOE-funded technologies in the United States; however, the FOAs will also state that these plans should not include requirements regarding the source of inputs used during the manufacturing process. Regardless of whether such plans will be part of the merit review criteria or a program policy factor, and to the extent legally permissible, all awards subject to this subpart, including subawards, for research, development, and/or demonstration, must include a provision that provides plans by the recipient and any subrecipients to support manufacturing in the United States of technology developed under the award. The recipient and any subrecipients must agree to make those plans binding on any assignee or licensee or any entity otherwise acquiring rights to any subject invention or developed technology covered under the award. A recipient, subrecipient, assignee, licensee, or any entity otherwise acquiring the rights to any subject invention or developed technology may request a waiver or modification of U.S. manufacturing plans from DOE. DOE will determine whether to approve such a waiver in light of equitable considerations, including, for example, whether the requester satisfactorily shows that the planned support is not economically feasible and whether there is a satisfactory alternative net benefit to the U.S. economy if the requested waiver or modification is approved.
[80 FR 53239, Sept. 3, 2015]
* 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. 04-50245

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ALFREDO SOTO-VAQUERA, also known as Alfred Soto,

also known as Alfredo Soto, also known as Alfredo

Vaguerra Soto, also known as Alfredo Soto Vaguerra,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-03-CR-401-ALL

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Alfredo SotoVaquera concedes that the arguments raised are foreclosed by

circuit precedent but seeks to preserve them for further review. 

The Government has moved for summary affirmance in lieu of filing

an appellee’s brief. The motion is GRANTED, and the judgment of

the district court is AFFIRMED.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 18, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
§ 1130.620 Intangible property acquired, but not developed or produced, under awards. ( a ) *OMB guidance.* OMB guidance in 2 CFR 200.315(a) addresses use and disposition of intangible property that is acquired under grants and cooperative agreements (in addition to vesting of title, which is implemented in § 1130.105 and appendix A to this part).
( b ) *DoD implementation.* DoD implements 2 CFR 200.315(a) through award terms and conditions that govern use and disposition of intangible property that is acquired, but not developed or produced, under awards.
( c ) *Award terms and conditions.* A DoD Component's general terms and conditions must include the wording appendix F to this part provides for Section D of PROP Article VI.
§ 960.5-1 System guidelines. ( a ) *Qualifying conditions* — ( 1 ) *Preclosure radiological safety.* Any projected radiological exposures of the general public and any projected releases of radioactive materials to restricted and unrestricted areas during repository operation and closure shall meet the applicable safety requirements set forth in 10 CFR part 20, 10 CFR part 60, and 40 CFR 191, subpart A (see appendix II of this part).
( 2 ) *Environment, socioeconomics, and transportation.* During repository siting, construction, operation, closure, and decommissioning the public and the environment shall be adequately protected from the hazards posed by the disposal of radioactive waste.
( 3 ) *Ease and cost of siting, construction, operation, and closure.* Repository siting, construction, operation, and closure shall be demonstrated to be technically feasible on the basis of reasonably available technology, and the associated costs shall be demonstrated to be reasonable relative to other available and comparable siting options.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 0 1 52 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DAVID JON KINDT ,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including February 22, 2021 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 16 2021

01/19/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0152
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 5- 12 04

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Pi m en io VelaHerrer a ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt
v. T am m y Mow ry , in th ei r in di vi du al cap aci ty; Mo nt e Hov ik , in the ir ind ivi dua l ca pa ci ty ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es Je ss e Ro bi ns , inth ei r in di vi du al cap aci ty ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t Je ro d Hah n, Dep uty , inth ei r in di vi du al cap aci ty; J. D. Su tp he n; Jer em y Bru ng ard , in th ei r in di vi du al cap aci ty ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e Dis tri ctof Ne br as ka- Om ah a

__ __ __ __ __ __ Subm it te d: Sep te m

be r 3, 2 01 5 Fil ed : Se pt em

be r 10 , 20 15 [Unpubl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, SMITH, an d B ENTON, Ci rcu itJu dg es .

__ __ __ __ __ __PER CURI AM.

P i m en io Herre ra ap pe al s fo ll owi ng th e di st ric t co urt’s adve rs e gr an t o f 1 su m m ary jud gm en t in hi s 42 U.S.C. § 19 83 act io n in vo lv in g c la im s th at de fen da nt s us ed ex ces si ve fo rce an d v i o l a t ed hi s co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s, by as saul ti ng hi m an d tra ns po rti ng hi m

un cl ot he d b etween de te nt io n fa ci li ti es . Fol lo win g c aref ul rev ie w, we affi rm fo r th e reas on s st at ed by th e di stric t co urt, se e 8t h Ci r. R. 47 B, an d we gr an t ap pe ll ees ’ m ot io ns to st rik e an affi da vi t Herrerafil edforth e fi rs t t im e o n app eal

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The Ho no rab le Jo se ph F. Bat ai ll on , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 Dis tri ctof Ne br as ka

. -2

-
#### KOCH v. FOX et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

January 15, 1915.)

Action by Anna T. Koch against William Fox, impleaded.

No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, also, 150 N. Y. Supp. 1092.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                             607
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  131,296
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    366,866
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               509,984
<PP&E>                                         344,616
<DEPRECIATION>                                 199,302
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 660,412
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          612,761
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        48,316
<OTHER-SE>                                    (83,094)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   660,412
<SALES>                                        359,798
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               359,798
<CGS>                                          182,970
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  182,970
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,657
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0<F1>
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,657
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01
<FN>
<F1>Although the Company's tax liability in third quarter 1998 was $731, this
amount was offset in its entirety by loss carryforwards from previous years.
The net tax liability for the quarter ending September 30, 1998 is zero.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>