alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeals of

-- ) ) ANSOL, Inc. ) ASBCA Nos. 59704, 60153, 60711 ) Under Contract No. NOOO 178-05-D-4180 etal. )
APPEARANCES FORTHE APPELLANT: Kevin J. Slattum, Esq. Mary E. Buxton, Esq.

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP Los Angeles, CA APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: E. Michael Chiaparas, Esq. DCMA ChiefTrial Attorney Srikanti Schaffner, Esq. Trial Attorney Defense Contract Management Agency Chantilly, VA ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Pursuant to appellant's 9 May 2017 motion to dismiss the above-captioned appeals with prejudice, which indicates that the motion was filed pursuantto a settlement agreement between the parties and that counsel for the government concurs in the request, the above-captioned appeals are hereby dismissed with prejudice.
Dated: 19May2017 

# f{Y

# c::>.V:~**~HD.WOODROW** Administrative Judge Armed Services Board ofContract AppealsI certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContractAppeals in ASBCA Nos. 59704, 60153, 60711, Appeals of ANSOL, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter.
Dated:

2 JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
Honorable Ted Butler Opinion i?O. M-974

Criminal District Attorney Bexar County Courthouse Re:Nay the date of selection SanAntonio, Texas 78204 of adepository of bexar County hospital District be changed from February to October and a related quesDear Mr. Dutler: tion.

You have requested our opinion concerning whether the bexar County Hospital District may legally select adepository in October instead of February.

In thepast the iiospitalDistrict has selected its depository in themonth of February of even numbered years. Section 10ofArticle 4494(n), Vernon's Civil Statutes, in part, provides that the hospital District shall select a depository "in themanner provided by law for selection of county depositories; and such depository shall be the depository of such District for aperiod of two years thereafter, until its successor is selected and qualified."

The statutes relative to county depositories require the selection by theCommissioner's Court at the February Regular Term. Article 2544, et seq.,Vernon's Civil Statutes. Provisions of statutes requiring the selection of adepository every twoyears aremandatory andmust be complied with in all respects. In re Cameron Trust Co., 51 S.W.2d 1025, (NO. sup. 1932); Attorney General's Opinion iJo.O-3837 (1941). Said Attorney General's Opinion states:

"We think the above mentioned statutes and contract itself fix the term of the depository and that such relation continues for such time and cannot be terminated atwill by either party to the contract."
In the above cited Nissouri case, at 51 S.W.2d 1026, the court held that the statute required the selection of a depository every two years; that tilecontract expired at the end of the twoyear period; "andcould not be extended or continued by common consent." -4755-Hon. Ted butler, page 2 (M-974)

InFebruary of 1970, thepresent depository was selected by the Bexar County Hospital District for a twoyear term. It is our opinion that the said Hospital District may not legally select anew depository inOctober of 1971, orextend the term for thedepository until October of 1972.
SUMNARY The aexar County iiospitalDistrict may not change themonth of selection of its depository from February toOctober after the depository was selected for a twoyear term in February of 1970. '7 Yo& very truly, 

# /

General of Texas Prepared by Jack Sparks " Assistant Attorney General APPKOVtiD: OPINIW COMM.ITTE;I;
~KernsTaylor, Chairman W.L. Allen, Co-Chairman John Reeves w-0. .shultz Lewis Jones I;)ill Corbusier

ALFRSD I?AXLR Rxecutive Assistant
NOLA WHIT& FirstAssistant

-4756-
#### § 1.1 Establishment of the U.S. Postal Service.

The U.S. Postal Service is established under the provisions of the Postal Reorganization Act (the Reorganization Act) of 1970, Public Law 91-375, 84 Stat. 719, as amended by the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2006 (PAEA), Public Law 109-435, 120 Stat. 3198, as an independent establishment of the executive branch of the Government of the United States, under the direction of a Board of Governors, with the Postmaster General as its chief executive officer. The Board of Governors of the Postal Service (the Board) directs the exercise of its powers through management that is expected to be honest, efficient, economical, and mindful of the competitive business environment in which the Postal Service operates. The Board consists of nine Governors appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to represent the public interest generally, together with the Postmaster General and Deputy Postmaster General.
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4930

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to permit the expansion

of medical residency training programs in geriatric medicine.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 24, 2000

Mr. GREEN of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on

Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker,

in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to permit

the expansion of medical residency training programs

in geriatric medicine.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Geriatric Workforce

5 Relief Act of 2000’’.
2

•HR 4930 IH

1 SEC. 2. PERMITTING EXPANSION OF MEDICAL RESIDENCY

2 TRAINING PROGRAMS IN GERIATRIC MEDI3 CINE.

4 (a) PAYMENT FOR DIRECT GRADUATE MEDICAL

5 EDUCATION.—Section 1886(h)(4)(F)(i) of the Social Se6 curity Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(h)(4)(F)(i)), as amended

7 by section 407(b) of the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP

8 Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999 (113 Stat.

9 1501A–374), as enacted into law by section 1000(a)(6)

10 of Public Law 106–113, is amended by inserting ‘‘or in

11 the case of a medical residency training program in geri12 atric medicine’’ after ‘‘in a rural area’’.

13 (b) PAYMENT FOR INDIRECT MEDICAL EDU14 CATION.—Section 1886(d)(5)(B)(v) of the Social Security

15 Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(5)(B)(v)), as so amended, is

16 amended by inserting ‘‘or in the case of a medical resi17 dency training program in geriatric medicine’’ after ‘‘in

18 a rural area’’.

19 (c) EFFECTIVE DATES.—

20 (1) DGME.—The amendment made by sub21 section (a) applies to cost reporting periods begin22 ning on or after April 1, 2001.

23 (2) IME.—The amendment made by subsection

24 (b) applies to discharges occurring on or after April

25 1, 2001.

Æ
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:  Statutory Considerations

															Home/ADR Resources and Guidance/Guidance/Statutory Considerations Statutory ConsiderationsADR2022-02-18T08:07:36-05:00
			
			Statutory ConsiderationsGuidance as to when to use–or not use–ADR may be found within the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act (ADRA) of 1990 itself.  Federal contracting personnel are required by the ADRA of 1996 to give consideration to specifically stated factors which, if present in a particular case, weigh against ADR use.  It must be emphasized that the ADRA of 1996 does not prohibit the use of ADR in cases where any or all the factors are present.  In every case, the presence or absence of the defined factors should be reviewed and taken into consideration by the contracting professional.  The ADRA factors are:
Whether a decision by an adjudicating body is needed by the agency for precedential value
Whether a significant issue of government policy requiring development in the law is present in the case
Whether maintaining an established policy or avoiding variations in decisions is of special importance
Whether the dispute involves parties that would not be parties to the ADR
Whether it is important to develop a full public record in the case
Whether the agency has a significant jurisdictional need to maintain control of the matter or to alter the ADR outcome5 USC 572(b).  Another situation where ADR is inappropriate is when there may be issues relating to fraud.  A Contracting Officer lacks authority to settle issues related to fraud.  The Department of Justice (DOJ) has the authority to resolve fraud matters.  If a contract dispute involves elements or allegations of fraud, it must be referred to DOJ. Copyright 2022 ADR.gov | All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use  |  FOIA  |  Section 508
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 3.4



                   CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION FILED TO CORRECT


                     A CERTAIN ERROR IN THE CERTIFICATE OF

                AMENDMENT TO THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF

                             ASIAINFO HOLDINGS, INC.

                 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE

                       OF DELAWARE ON NOVEMBER 15, 2000.



ASIAINFO HOLDINGS, INC., a corporation organized and existing under and by

virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware,



DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

     1.  The name of the corporation is ASIAINFO HOLDINGS, INC.

     2.  That a Certificate of Amendment to the Certificate of incorporation of
ASIAINFO HOLDINGS, INC. was filed with the Secretary of State of Delaware on
November 15, 2000 and that said Certificate requires correction as permitted by
Section 103 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

     3.  The inaccuracy or defect of said Certificate to be corrected is as
follows:

         The authorized capital was mistaken.

     4.  Article FIFTH of the Certificate is corrected to read as follows:

         The aggregate number of shares which the Corporation shall have
authority to issue is 110,000,000 Common and Preferred shares: the total
number of shares of Common Stock shall be 100,000,000 with par value of one
cent ($.01) per share and the total number of shares of Preferred Stock shall
be 10,000,000 with par value of one cent ($.01) per share.


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said ASIAINFO HOLDINGS, INC. has caused this
Certificate to be signed by James Ding, its Chief Executive Officer, this 18th
day of January, 2001.


                                                        ASIAINFO HOLDINGS, INC.


                                                   By:     /s/  James Ding
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       Chief Executive Officer
* 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. 07-30340

Conference Calendar

CARMEN GRICCO

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

JOHN R. PADOVA; BRIAN ASTON; FREDRICK MENIFEE

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 1:06-CV-1988

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Carmen Gricco appeals the 28 U.S.C. § 1915A dismissal as frivolous and

for failure to state a claim of his Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) lawsuit. We

review the district court’s dismissal de novo. Ruiz v. United States, 160 F.3d

273, 275 (5th Cir. 1998). 

If his brief is liberally construed, Gricco renews his argument that his

lawsuit is brought exclusively under the FTCA, as well as his claims that his

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 24, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-30340

2

criminal judgment is void, that he should be immediately released from prison,

and that he is entitled to monetary damages. As the district court determined,

Gricco’s FTCA complaintfails as he did not seek to hold liable the United States,

the proper defendant for such an action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b); Atorie Air, Inc.

v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 942 F.2d 954, 957 (5th Cir. 1991). Gricco has

abandoned by failing to brief any challenge to the district court’s determination

that he has not sued the proper party. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy

Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, dismissal was

appropriate. 

The instant appeal is without arguable merit and is therefore dismissed

as frivolous. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983); 5TH CIR.

R. 42.2. Gricco is cautioned that the dismissal by the district court of his suit

and the dismissal of his appeal as frivolous count as two strikes under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996).

Gricco is cautioned that if he accumulates three strikes under § 1915(g), he will

not be able to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while

he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger

of serious physical injury. See § 1915(g). Gricco’s motion for the appointment

of counsel is denied.

APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION DENIED; SANCTION WARNING

ISSUED.
§ 66.05-5 Definitions. ( a ) The term *State waters for private aids to navigation* means those navigable waters of the United States which the Commandant, upon request of a State Administrator, has designated as waters within which a State government may regulate the establishment, operation, and maintenance of marine aids to navigation, including regulatory markers. The Commandant will entertain requests to make such designations with respect to navigable waters of the United States not marked by the Federal government. These designations when approved will be set forth in separate sections by States in this subpart and will briefly describe or identify waters so designated.
( b ) The term Uniform State Waterway Marking System (USWMS) means the system of private aids to navigation which may be operated in State waters. Subpart 66.10, which describes the USWMS, expires on December 31, 2003.
( c ) The term *State Administrator* means the official of a State having power under the law of the State to regulate, establish, operate or maintain maritime aids to navigation on waters over which the State has jurisdiction.
( d ) The term *State aids to navigation* means all private marine aids to navigation operated in State waters for private aids to navigation, whether owned by a State, political subdivisions thereof or by individuals, corporations, or organizations.
( e ) The term *regulate State maritime aids to navigation* means to control the establishment, disestablishment, operation and maintenance of State aids to navigation.
[CGFR 66-32, 31 FR 10320, July 30, 1966, as amended by CGD 97-018, 63 FR 33573, June 19, 1998]
Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF POLICY

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Transmittal to Docket: Summary of the March 10, 2011, Public Meetings in 

Denver, Colorado, regarding the Environmental Protection Agency’s 

Implementation of Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review

FROM: Stuart C. Miles-McLean

Office of Regulatory Policy and Management

TO: Public Docket #EPA-HQ-OA-2011-0156: Improving Regulations: General

As called for by President Obama in Executive Order 13563, "to facilitate the periodic 

review of existing significant regulations," the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 

considering "how best to promote retrospective analysis of rules that may be outmoded, 

ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal 

them in accordance with what has been learned." 

As part of its retrospective review of regulations, EPA convened public meetings around 

the country to gather input on how we might design the plan we will use to periodically review 

our regulations. This Memo transmits to the docket a summary two public meetings held on

March 10, 2011, in Denver, Colorado.
#### § 83.11 Application (Rule 11).

Rules 11 through 18 (§§ 83.11 through 83.18) apply to vessels in sight of one another.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Adams Resources & Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 (the “Report”), I, K. S. Adams, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/ K. S. Adams, Jr.


K. S. Adams, Jr.


Chief Executive Officer





Date: August 12, 2010
































This Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed “filed” by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and shall not be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the date of this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other documents authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
###### Editorial Note on Part 96

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 96 appear by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36281, June 25, 2010, and by USCG-2014-0410, 79 FR 38432, July 7, 2014.

#### § 96.300 Purpose.

This subpart establishes the standards for the responsible person of a company and its vessel(s) to obtain the required and voluntary, national and international certification for the company's and vessel's safety management system.
Exhibit 32(a)

                                  CERTIFICATION

                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The
Southern Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, we, the undersigned,
hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of our individual
knowledge and belief, that:

     (1)  such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The Southern Company for the
          quarter ended June 30, 2005, which this statement accompanies, fully
          complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of The
          Southern Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, fairly presents,
          in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
          operations of The Southern Company.

                                       /s/David M. Ratcliffe
                                         David M. Ratcliffe
                                       Chairman, President and
                                       Chief Executive Officer

                                       /s/Thomas A. Fanning
                                         Thomas A. Fanning
                                      Executive Vice President,
                                Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

Date:  August 3, 2005
EXHIBIT 

31.1 

 

CERTIFICATIONS 

 

I, George Lefevre, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of MotivNation Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2006.

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does 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 circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by the quarterly report; and 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the quarterly report. 

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Company and have: 

 

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which the quarterly report is being prepared; 

 

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in the quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by the quarterly report based on such evaluation; and 

 

c) disclosed in the quarterly report any change in the Company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company's internal control over financial reporting; 

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company's auditors and the audit committee of Company's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions); 

 

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the Company's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Company's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and 

 

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Company's internal controls over financial reporting. 

 

 

 

| Dated: 			August 18, 2006 | By:/s/			George lefevre                        |
|--------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

George Lefevre CEO