alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4990 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4990

 To make appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for the Federal share of 
certain construction costs of a sewage treatment facility in Waterbury, 
                              Connecticut.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 27, 2000

  Mr. Maloney of Connecticut introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Appropriations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To make appropriations for fiscal year 2001 for the Federal share of 
certain construction costs of a sewage treatment facility in Waterbury, 
                              Connecticut.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for fiscal year 2001:

                    Environmental Protection Agency

                   state and tribal assistance grants

    For an additional amount for ``State and Tribal Assistance 
Grants'', for a grant to the City of Waterbury, Connecticut, for 
payment of the Federal share of a balloon payment due by the City in 
July 2001 for the construction of a sewage treatment facility, 
$2,800,000.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6367

PEGGY TAYLOR FERGUSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versusSTATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLIE CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees.

No. 99-6368

PEGGY TAYLOR FERGUSON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus MICHAEL W. MOORE, Commissioner of SCDC; CHARLIE CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina; SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondents - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-98-3495-2-10-AJ, CA-98-3497-2-10-AJ)2 Submitted: July 22, 1999 Decided: July 27, 1999 Before ERVIN, HAMILTON, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Peggy Taylor Ferguson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Peggy Taylor Ferguson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on her petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254(West 1994 & Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny acertificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Ferguson v. Moore , Nos. CA-98-3495-2-10-AJ; CA-98-3497-2-10-AJ (D.S.C. Feb. 22, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED
#### § 3001.115 Additional limitation on acceptance of anything of value.

Regardless of 5 CFR 2635.203(b)(7), a Commission employee may not accept a gift from the Postal Service, unless another exception or exclusion to 5 CFR 2635.203 applies or a waiver is granted by the DAEO.

[82 FR 50321, Oct. 31, 2017. Redesignated at 85 FR 9615, Feb. 19, 2020]
Senior Nutrition Program Activity Guide:

Car Show & Parade

This activity is a fun way to engage nutrition program participants through a safely distant event. 

It promotes socialization, which helps to improve physical health, mental health, and nutrition. 

Socialization is one key to wellness, and it is part of the Senior Nutrition Program mission. This event 

also makes a connection with other community members who can see the parade – not just those 

directly involved.

Coordination

Assign a coordinator to plan and manage the event.

Recruit volunteers to help on event day.

Select a date and time for the event and create a 

signup form for cars that want to be in the parade.

Coordinate with a senior living or other neighborhood 

for the parade. If its parking lot cannot accommodate 

a socially distanced post-parade car show, identify 

another spot like a local business.

Promote the event on flyers, in newsletters, and on 

social media.

Make paper certificates for winners of various 

categories (e.g., most unique car, most colorful car).

Assign volunteers to specific event day tasks, like 

directing parade traffic or handing out certificates.

Remind participants and volunteers by phone and/or 

email the day before the event.

Check in with the community location contact(s) and 

confirm details one week and one day before.

Safety First

Be sure that all participants—both in advance and on site 

—are reminded of all safety rules and tips. These include 

things like wearing a mask, keeping distance, staying in 

cars during certain parts of the event, as well as any official 

local/state guidance and specifics for your event.

Prepare volunteers with guidance and make sure they 

know what to do if there are any issues.

Parade

Participants decorate their cars and drive to the parade 

location. Consider picking a theme (e.g., spring fling, 

throwback to the 60s, movies and television) for the 

event to help people come up with ideas for decorating 

their vehicles. 

Cars will line up at a designated starting place, in order 

of arrival. The cars, led by a coordinator/volunteer car, 

drive the parade route. You may wish to mark the route 

with flags or signs if there are several turns to make, or if 

traveling through more than one neighborhood. 

Encourage car occupants to wave and cheer to socially 

distanced parade viewers. Neighborhoods may have 

specific advice on honking.

Car Show

Once the parade has ended, cars park in the 

predetermined ending location. If awarding winners, 

judges will walk around and score the cars. Once winners 

are selected, have a single volunteer place the certificates 

on windshields for a completely contactless experience!

It will be hard to communicate with a group of participants 

if everyone is spread out and/or in their cards. Think about 

ways to make announcements and be creative under the 

circumstances.

The Administration for Community Living (ACL) is an operating division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services. ACL administers the National Senior Nutrition Program, which is funded by the Older Americans Act. ACL.gov
ex72.htm






  





  











  













 



Exhibit 10.72




 


DEMAND PROMISSORY NOTE


 


 







 


 







 


 


$400,000                                                                           Date:  May 3, 2012


 


 







 


 


FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned jointly and severally promise to pay to the order of Warren Breslow, the sum of Four Hundred Thousand Dollars and no/100 ($400,000.00), together with interest of 10% per annum on the unpaid balance.


 


 


The entire principal and any accrued interest shall be fully and immediately payable UPON DEMAND of any holder thereof.


 


 







 


 


 

 


 


 


”Borrower”


 


Aura Systems, Inc.

















_/s/ Melvin Gagerman___________________


Melvin Gagerman


Chief Executive Officer







 


Dated: May 3, 2012
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Benjamin A. Horowitz, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Opsware Inc. on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Opsware Inc.



Date: April 15, 2005



By:

/s/    BENJAMIN A. HOROWITZName:

Benjamin A. HorowitzTitle:

Chief Executive Officer




A signed original of this
written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by it and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                         9
<MULTIPLIER>                                      1
       
<S>                                     <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 3-MOS
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                   12,003,940
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       92,113
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                          6,291,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                  0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>             192,433,075
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                            0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                              0
<LOANS>                                 287,828,127
<ALLOWANCE>                               3,218,426
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          515,435,265
<DEPOSITS>                              383,251,075
<SHORT-TERM>                             88,257,113
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                       7,159,898
<LONG-TERM>                               2,020,541
<COMMON>                                  7,824,185
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                               26,922,453
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>          515,435,265
<INTEREST-LOAN>                           6,305,911
<INTEREST-INVEST>                         2,940,498
<INTEREST-OTHER>                             81,445
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                          9,327,854
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                        3,843,092
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        5,064,528
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                     4,263,326
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                60,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                          156,000
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                           3,391,776
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           1,807,964
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                1,253,507
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                              1,253,507
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.40
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                 0360
<LOANS-NON>                                 713,000
<LOANS-PAST>                              1,121,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                            555,000
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                   0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                     0
<RECOVERIES>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                               0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                           0
        

</TABLE>
#### § 401.202 Statute providing for assessment, mitigation or remission of civil penalties.

Section 13 of sec. 2 of the Port and Tanker Safety Act of 1978 authorizes the assessment and collection of a civil penalty of not more than $25,000 from anyone who violates a regulation issued under that section.

(68 Stat. 93-96, 33 U.S.C. 981-990, as amended; and secs. 12 and 13 of sec. 2 of Pub. L. 95-474, 92 Stat. 1471)

[47 FR 20582, May 13, 1982]
Editorial Note on Part 165
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 165 appear by USCG-2006-25556, 72 FR 36328, 36329, July 2, 2007 and by USCG-2018-1049, 84 FR 7813, Mar. 5, 2019.

§ 165.778 Security Zone; Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. ( a ) *Security zone.* A moving and fixed security zone is established around all cruise ships entering, departing, mooring, or anchoring in the Port of Mayaguez, Puerto Rico. The regulated area includes all waters from surface to bottom within a 50-yard radius of the vessel. The zone is activated when a cruise ship on approach to the Port of Mayaguez enters within 1 nautical mile of the Bahia de Mayaguez Range Front Light located in position 18°13′12′′ N 067°10′46′′ W. The zone is deactivated when a cruise ship departs the Port of Mayaguez and is no longer within 1 nautical mile of the Bahia de Mayaguez Range Front Light.
( b ) *Definitions.* As used in this section: *Cruise ship* means any vessel over 100 gross registered tons, carrying more than 12 passengers for hire.
*Designated representative* means Coast Guard Patrol Commanders including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels and Federal, State, and local officers designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port San Juan in the enforcement of the security zone.
*Vessel* means every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water, except U.S. Coast Guard or U.S. Naval vessels and servicing pilot and tug boats.
( c ) *Regulations.* ( 1 ) No person or vessel may enter into the security zone under this section unless authorized by the Captain of the Port San Juan.
( 2 ) Vessels seeking to enter a security zone established in this section, may contact the COTP on VHF channel 16 or by telephone at (787) 289-2041 to request permission.
( 3 ) All persons and vessels granted permission to enter the security zone must comply with the orders of the Captain of the Port San Juan and designated on-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel. On-scene U.S. Coast Guard patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard.
[USCG-2008-0070, 74 FR 14049, Mar. 30, 2009, as amended by USCG-2018-0231, 84 FR 7288, Mar. 4, 2019]
MEETING AGENDA AND ATTENDANCE

Meeting Date/Time: August 10th, 2016 1:30pm – 3:00pm

Location: This will be a dial-in only meeting.

Agenda and Highlights:

1) The Executive Committee is developing basic training for new federal ombudsman and others 

who are interested in federal ombudsman work, we are seeking input from membership on what 

you think is essential to such training and on how you think the information is best delivered. 

Please think about and be prepared to share:

1) Your top three items that you believe are essential for a new Ombuds to know

2) Your thoughts on how best to deliver this information

Or, if you are a new Ombuds, what could we share that would help you?

2) Update on the COFO Annual Conference

3) What can you do if there is retaliation or the perception of retaliation for working with the 

Ombudsman’s Office?

Attendees:

Phone 

Ayad, Amina

Barrar, Riley – Department of State

Brady, Jenifer - Department of Homeland Security

Campbell, Sally

Day-Lewis, Kimberly - Department of Homeland Security

Dean, Karen – Department of Commerce

Deyo, Scott – Department of Defense

Dodson, Shireen – Department of State

Fleming, Tasha – Department of Justice

Gordon, Laurel – Department of Justice

Harley, Jasmine – National Credit Union Administration

Janson, Michael – Federal Communications Commission

Kinnavy, Noreen – International Broadcasting Bureau Voice of America and Office of Cuba 

Broadcasting

Kurtz, Becky - Department of Health and Human Services
Larkins, Marcia - Department of Health and Human Services

Luckam, Stephanie - Department of Homeland Security

McGuire, Carrie – Office of Government Services

Marcos, Anne Marie - Department of Homeland Security

Merrix, Celeste - Department of Homeland Security

Milner, Heather – Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Morey, Chauncenette – Department of Justice

Pontillo, Pamela – Department of Energy

Qaasim, Kakeisla - Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Roberts, Sara - Department of Homeland Security

Roman, Rafael – National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration

Sarkissian, Mandy – Supreme Court of Virginia

Smith, Tyler - Department of Health and Human Services

Sotoudeh, Paul – Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Stukes, Jock – Department of Defense

Vergott, Dale – Department of Defense

Wadsley, Kate – Department of Defense

Weber, Guy – Department of Defense
Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 204-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/15/2023 Page 1 of 4
Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 204-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/15/2023 Page 2 of 4
Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 204-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/15/2023 Page 3 of 4
Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 204-6 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/15/2023 Page 4 of 4
FeedbackSite MapContact

HOW CAN WE HELP YOU?
		Search for:
	HomeAbout ADRLegislation and Interagency ADR Working GroupReport for the President on Significant Developments in Federal Alternative Dispute Resolution, January 2017 (PDF)External-Facing Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution Services for the PublicConflict Prevention, Management and Resolution Services for the Federal WorkforcePrograms and ContactsResources and GuidanceConflict Prevention, Management and Resolution Resources for Federal ADR ProgramsInteragency ADR Working Group Resource CenterEventsCoalition of Federal Ombuds
Search for:  Administrative Enforcement and Regulatory Process

															Home/About the Interagency Working Group/Administrative Enforcement and Regulatory Process Administrative Enforcement and Regulatory ProcessADR2022-02-16T16:08:51-05:00
			
			Administrative Enforcement and Regulatory ProcessSection Chair:
Deborah Osborne
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 1st Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20426Deborah.Osborne@ferc.gov
**AERP Updates**
July, 2015 Report
February, 2014 Report
The formerly named “Civil Enforcement and Regulatory Section” (CERS), one of four sections of the Interagency ADR Working Group, was initially conceived to educate and assist management and staff of federal member agencies in using ADR in administrative enforcement disputes. The mandate of the section was soon expanded, however, to include regulatory and compliance conflicts in such areas as agency environmental, business, and transactional disputes. Since that time, the Administrative Enforcement and Regulatory Process Section (“AERP”) has consistently reached out to member agencies to encourage and expand the use of ADR in administrative enforcement and regulatory cases, recognizing that ADR provides options for quick, low cost, and durable resolution of disputes, with long lasting benefits of improved relationships and enhanced trust in the federal government.
AERP provides a variety of services for management and staff of federal agencies involved in enforcement, compliance, and regulatory activities, including:
Training in the effective use of ADR;
Providing guidance for ADR program development;
Disseminating information about government experiences with ADR;
Providing tools to evaluate when – and whether – to use ADR;
Disseminating proven approaches for addressing barriers to ADR; and
Offering a “Consultation Team” to provide personalized assistance to agencies interested in developing and implementing an ADR program. Copyright 2022 ADR.gov | All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use  |  FOIA  |  Section 508
FeedbackSite MapContact

HOW CAN WE HELP YOU?
		Search for:
	HomeAbout ADRLegislation and Interagency ADR Working GroupReport for the President on Significant Developments in Federal Alternative Dispute Resolution, January 2017 (PDF)External-Facing Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution Services for the PublicConflict Prevention, Management and Resolution Services for the Federal WorkforcePrograms and ContactsResources and GuidanceConflict Prevention, Management and Resolution Resources for Federal ADR ProgramsInteragency ADR Working Group Resource CenterEventsCoalition of Federal Ombuds
Search for:  Key Elements to Implementing a Successful ADR Program

															Home/ADR Resources and Guidance/Key Elements to Implementing a Successful ADR Program Key Elements to Implementing a Successful ADR ProgramADR2022-02-16T13:04:35-05:00
			
			Key Elements to Implementing a Successful ADR ProgramReview the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 and the Presidential Memorandum of May 1, 1998, for legislative and executive guidance.
Learn as much as possible about existing federal ADR program structures to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort in creating your agency’s program.
Visit the Working Group’s ADR website at http://www.adr.gov/ to obtain useful ADR documents, get recent updates on federal ADR developments, and participate in newsgroup discussions with ADR experts in other federal offices.
Ensure that your agency makes a long-term commitment by senior leadership to the establishment of an ADR program, pursuant to the Presidential Memorandum.
If your agency does not yet have a policy statement on the use of ADR, encourage your agency leadership to adopt the ADR Declaration of Policy prepared by the Working Group which is provided on the Working Group’s website.
Secure the financial resoucres, dedicated staffing, and expertise necessary to establish and operate a federal ADR program. This includes a support structure to match agency ADR needs with appropriate agency or private-sector ADR resources.
If your agency has not yet done so, appoint a Dispute Resolution Specialist as required by the 1996 Act, so that there will be a clear point of contact for those wishing to use the agency’s ADR program.
Ensure that appropriate agency personnel receive ADR education and skills training which can encompass both the theory and practice of negotiation, mediation, and related ADR techniques for both program managers and the agency’s counsel.
Review the agency’s standard agreements, contracts, grants, and other documents to determine whether to amend such standard agreements to authorize and encourage the use of ADR if disuptes arise.
Create a system to track ADR use and “lessons learned” to ensure continued progress toward the goals identified in establishing the ADR program. Copyright 2022 ADR.gov | All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use  |  FOIA  |  Section 508
Exhibit 21.1

HENRY BROS. ELECTRONICS, INC. AND
SUBSIDIARIES

|                                       |  |             
|-------------------------------------- |  | ------------
|Entity Name                            |  | Jurisdiction
|                                       |  |             
|                                      
|Registrant:                            |  |             
|                                       |  |             
|Henry Bros.
  Electronics, Inc.        |  | Delaware    
|                                       |  |             
|Subsidiaries:                          |  |             
|                                       |  |             
|Henry Bros.
  Electronics, Inc.        |  | New Jersey  
|                                       |  |             
|Henry Bros.
  Electronics, Inc.        |  | California  
|                                       |  |             
|Henry Bros.
  Electronics, LLC         |  | Arizona     
|                                       |  |             
|National
  Safe of California, Inc.    |  | California  
|                                       |  |             
|Airorlite
  Communications, Inc.       |  | New Jersey  
|                                       |  |             
|Securus,
  Inc.                        |  | Colorado    
|                                       |  |             
|Diversified
  Security Solutions, Inc. |  | New York    
|                                       |  |             
|Henry Bros.
  Electronics, Inc.        |  | Colorado    
|                                       |  |             
|Henry Bros
  Electronics, Inc.         |  | Virginia    
|                                       |  |             
|CIS Security
  Systems, Inc.           |  | Virginia    

---