alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 102-194.30 What role does my agency play in the Standard and Optional Forms Management Program? Your agency head or designee's role is to: ( a ) Designate an agency-level Standard and Optional Forms Liaison representative and alternate, and notify GSA, in writing, of their names, titles, mailing addresses, telephone numbers, fax numbers, and e-mail addresses within 30 days of the designation or redesignation.
( b ) Promulgate Governmentwide Standard forms under the agency's statutory or regulatory authority in the Federal Register, and issue procedures on the mandatory use, revision, or cancellation of these forms.
( c ) Ensure that the agency complies with the provisions of the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) (Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat 2681), Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 74d), as amended, the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) Standards (36 CFR part 1194), and OMB implementing guidance. In particular, agencies should allow the submission of Standard and Optional forms in an electronic/automated version unless the form is specifically exempted by § 102-194.40.
( d ) Issue Governmentwide Optional forms when needed by two or more agencies and announce the availability, revision, or cancellation of these forms. Forms prescribed through a regulation for use by the Federal Government must be issued as a Standard form.
( e ) Obtain GSA approval for each new, revised or canceled Standard and Optional form, 60 days prior to planned implementation. Certify that the forms comply with all applicable laws and regulations. Provide an electronic form unless exempted by § 102-194.40. Revised forms not approved by GSA will result in cancellation of the form.
( f ) Provide GSA with both an electronic (unless exempted by § 102-194.40) and paper version of the official image of the Standard or Optional form prior to implementation.
( g ) Obtain the prescribing agency's approval for exceptions to Standard and Optional forms, including electronic forms or automated formats prior to implementation.
( h ) Review annually agency prescribed Standard and Optional forms, including exceptions, for improvement, consolidation, cancellation, or possible automation. The review must include approved electronic versions of the forms.
( i ) Coordinate all health-care related Standard and Optional forms through GSA for the approval of the Interagency Committee on Medical Records (ICMR).
( j ) Promote the use of electronic forms within the agency by following what the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) prescribes and all guidance issued by the Office of Management and Budget and other responsible agencies. This guidance will promote the use of electronic transactions and electronic signatures.
( k ) Notify GSA of the replacement of any Standard or Optional form by an automated format or electronic form, and its impact on the need to stock the paper form. GSA's approval is not necessary for this change, but a one-time notification should be made.
( l ) Follow the specific instructions in the Standard and Optional Forms Procedural Handbook.
Appendix E: Cost per Volunteer 

Service Year Calculator for FY 2024

Overview

Organizations applying for funding for AmeriCorps Seniors Foster Grandparent, Senior 

Companion, and stipended Senior Demonstration Program projects in Fiscal Year 2024

(FY 2024)

1

 have a Cost per VSY of $9,000. This means they must place at least one 

Volunteer Service Year (VSY) in a workplan that results in National Performance 

Measure Outcomes for every $9,000 in AmeriCorps Seniors funding. A VSY is 1,044 hours 

of service, and includes time a volunteer spends in service, orientation and training 

hours, and stipended leave.

Common arithmetic rules should be used to determine how to round VSYs for outcomebased work plans. Applicants should round to the nearest whole number. For example, 

an AmeriCorps Seniors applicant with stipended volunteers that is requesting $100,000 in 

federal funding would require 11.1 VSYs in work plans that result in national performance 

measure outcomes (100,000/9,000 =11.1). Since 11.1 is less than 11.5, this would be 

rounded down to 11 VSYs in work plans that result in national performance measure 

outcomes. In contrast, an applicant with $150,000 in federal funding (16.6 VSYs in 

outcome-based work plans) would round up and require 17 VSYs in work plans that 

result in national performance measures outcomes. 

VSY Calculator 

In the table below, enter the amount of AmeriCorps Seniors funding you are applying 

for. The number of VSYs you have to place into outcome-based workplans for that 

amount of funding will be calculated for you. 

Amount of AmeriCorps Seniors funding:

Amount of funding / 9000: 

Number of VSYs you have to place in 

outcome-based workplans: 

Entering VSYs into Work Plans in eGrants 

Due to limitations with eGrants, the work plans will ask for “Number of Unduplicated 

Volunteers.” This is the field in which you enter your VSYs. For more detailed information

on completing the work plans, please see the Grant Application Instructions. 

1 FY 2024 begins on October 1, 2023.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RASHEED MALCOLM,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 418 EAL 2023

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 29th day of May, 2024, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

GRANTED. The issues, rephrased for clarity, are:

(1) Did the Superior Court err in affirming the trial court’s admission of 

Petitioner’s videotaped interrogation, over Petitioner’s objection?

(2) Where videotaped interrogations are sought to be admitted at trial, what 

steps should the parties and trial courts take to reduce undue prejudice 

while providing appropriate context so that jurors can appropriately weigh 

the evidence?
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-7359

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMES W. BAILEY, JR., a/k/a James W. “Bill” Bailey, Jr.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western 

District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, 

District Judge. (1:11-cr-00010-MR-DLH-1; 1:14-cv-00310-MR)

Submitted: February 23, 2017 Decided: February 28, 2017

Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James W. Bailey, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin Bain-Creed, 

Jonathan Henry Ferry, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, 

Charlotte, North Carolina, Richard Lee Edwards, Amy Elizabeth 

Ray, Assistant United States Attorneys, Paul Bradford Taylor, 

Corey F. Ellis, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, 

North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

James W. Bailey, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for 

reconsideration of the district court’s order denying relief on 

his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable 

unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate 

of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of 

the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) 

(2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that 

reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. 

Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district court 

denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the 

denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Bailey has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 22-cv-23074-BLOOM/OTAZO-REYES

OCTAVIO COLLADO,

Plaintiff,

COLLECTIVE ACTION

v.

450 NORTH RIVER DRIVE, LLC,

D/B/A KIKI ON THE RIVER,

RJ RIVER, LLC AND ROMAN JONES,

Defendants.

__________________________________/

CONSENT TO JOIN PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C. §216(b)

1. My name is _____________________________________.

2. I consent, agree, and opt to become a Plaintiff in this lawsuit brought under the 

FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §201, et seq., against my current/former employer, 450 North River Drive, LLC,

d/b/a Kiki on the River, and alleged employers RJ River, LLC, and Roman Jones (collectively 

“Defendants”).

3. I wish to assert a claim for alleged unpaid/underpaid tips against Kiki on the River 

and the other Defendants for the tips I allege I’m owed.

4. I agree to be bound by any adjudication of this action by the Court, whether it is 

favorable or unfavorable. I further agree to be bound by any collective action settlement herein 

that is recommended by FairLaw Firm, approved by the Class Representative, and approved by 

the Court as fair and reasonable.

5. I designate the FairLaw Firm to represent me in this case.

Dated ______________, 2023. Signed:_________________________

Printed Name:____________________

Your Address, Email, and Telephone Are Needed, But Will Not Filed With The Court

Address: _________________________________ Tel No.:___________________________

_________________________________ Email: ____________________________

MAIL, EMAIL, OR FAX YOUR COMPLETED FORM TO:

FairLaw Firm

135 San Lorenzo Avenue, Suite 770, Coral Gables, FL 33156 / brian@fairlawattorney.com

TEL 305.230.4884 TEXT 786.386.0885 FAX 305.230.4844

Case 1:22-cv-23074-BB Document 168-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/21/2023 Page 1 of 1

07/26/2023

917-929-0934

miami fl, 33125

1569 nw 17th av apt 1123

davis_alvarez00@hotmail.com

Davis Alvarez

Case 1:22-cv-23074-BB Document 172-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/26/2023 Page 1 of 1
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6652** 

WILLIAM RANDOLPH GRANDISON , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. HAROLD W. CLARKE , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond
. Henry E. Hudson , District Judge. ( 3:11

- cv - 00348

- HEH )

Submitted : July 26, 2012 Decided: August 2, 2012

Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. William Randolph Grandison, Appellant Pro Se. Virginia Bidwell Theisen, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: William Randolph Grandison seeks t o appeal the district court’s order d eny ing relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition . We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the distric t court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notic e of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court’s order was entered on the docket

on February 24, 2012. The notice of appeal was filed on April 6, 2012
. Because Grandison fail ed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. * We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pre sented in the materials

* Although the district court erroneously informed Grandison that he had sixty

— rather than thirty

— days to appeal, we cannot excuse his untimely filing under the unique circumstances doctrine. Bowles , 551 U.S. at 214.3 before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.

DISMISSED
§ 102-33.35 How can we get help in carrying out our responsibilities? To get help in carrying out your responsibilities under this part, you may— ( a ) Call or write to GSA's Aviation Policy Division (see definition in § 102-33.20); or
( b ) Find additional aviation program management information on the Internet at *http://www.gsa.gov/aviationpolicy .*
<PAGE>   1
EXHIBIT 11.1


                                 ENDOCARE, INC.
                       CALCULATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                Year Ended
                                                             December 31, 1996
                                                             -----------------
<S>                                                          <C>
Net loss                                                     $     (1,531,448)
                                                             =================


Weighted average number of common shares
     outstanding during the period                                  5,634,561
                                                             =================



Primary net loss per share                                            $  (.27)
                                                                      ========

Fully diluted net loss per share                                      $  (.27)
                                                                      ========
</TABLE>




    Notes:    Earnings per share data is not presented for 1995 because ENDOcare
              was operating as a division of Medstone International, Inc.
              at that time.

              The effect of potential exercise of common stock options is not
              included in these calculations because such effect would be
              anti-dilutive.



                                     - 53 -
Exhibit 12
                        AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.
           Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                             (in millions)
<Table>
<Caption>
                                                Three Months Ended March 31,
                                                  2004            2003

                                             <c>               <c>
Earnings (loss):
 Loss before income taxes                        $  (182)         $(1,032)

 Add: Total fixed charges (per below)                368              385

 Less: Interest capitalized                           17               18
  Total earnings (loss) before income taxes     $    169         $   (665)

Fixed charges:
 Interest                                       $    160         $    150

 Portion of rental expense representative of
  the interest factor                                206              233

 Amortization of debt expense                          2                2
  Total fixed charges                           $    368         $    385

Coverage deficiency                             $    199         $  1,050
</Table>
Note:As  of  March 31, 2004, American has guaranteed approximately
     $1.3 billion of AMR's  unsecured debt and approximately  $484
     million  of AMR  Eagle's  secured  debt. The impact of  these
     unconditional guarantees is not included in the above computation.
§ 102-5.65 What procedures apply when the need for home-to-work transportation exceeds the initial period? The agency head may approve unlimited subsequent determinations, when the need for home-to-work transportation exceeds the initial period, for no longer than: ( a ) Two years each for field work, updated as necessary; and
( b ) Ninety calendar days each for other circumstances.
EXHIBIT 32.1

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, Morteza Ejabat, Chief Executive Officer of Zhone Technologies, Inc. (the Company), and Kirk Misaka, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify that, to their knowledge:



|1. | The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 (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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: March 16, 2010



|                        |  |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|/s/ MORTEZA EJABAT      |  |  |  | /s/ KIRK MISAKA        
|Morteza Ejabat          |  |  |  | Kirk Misaka            
|Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5442

To provide for a pilot program to enhance military recruiting through the

use of recently retired enlisted personnel as recruiters.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 11, 2000

Mr. HEFLEY (for himself and Mr. MCINNIS) introduced the following bill;

which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To provide for a pilot program to enhance military recruiting

through the use of recently retired enlisted personnel

as recruiters.

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 ‘‘Military Recruiting

5 Enhancement Act of 2000’’.

6 SEC. 2. PILOT PROGRAM TO ENHANCE MILITARY RECRUIT7 ING.

8 (a) PILOT PROGRAM.—The Secretary of the Air

9 Force shall carry out during fiscal years 2002 and 2003

10 a pilot program to determine the effectiveness of using as
2

•HR 5442 IH

1 military recruiters recently retired enlisted members of the

2 Air Force who volunteer to be recalled to active duty to

3 serve for that purpose and who are determined appro4 priate for that purpose by the Secretary.

5 (b) SCOPE OF PROGRAM.—Not more than 200 retired

6 members of the Air Force may be recalled to active duty

7 for purposes of the pilot program at any time. The period

8 of a recall to active duty under the pilot program may

9 not exceed two years or extend beyond September 30,

10 2004.

11 (c) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 180 days

12 after the end of the pilot program, the Secretary of the

13 Air Force shall submit to the Committee on Armed Serv14 ices of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services

15 of the House of Representatives a report on the pilot pro16 gram. The report shall—

17 (1) describe the experience under the pilot pro18 gram;

19 (2) set forth the Secretary’s assessment of (A)

20 the efficacy of the program for military recruiting,

21 and (B) the effect of the program on career patterns

22 for junior active-duty enlisted personnel who, but for

23 the pilot program, would have been assigned to mili24 tary recruiting duty; and
3

•HR 5442 IH

1 (3) include the Secretary’s recommendations as

2 to continuation or expansion of the program.

Æ
§ 102-38.290 What types of payment may we accept? You must adopt a payment policy that protects the Government against fraud. Acceptable payments include, but are not limited to, the following: ( a ) U.S. currency or any form of credit instrument made payable on demand in U.S. currency, e.g., cashier's check, money order. Promissory notes and postdated credit instruments are not acceptable.
( b ) Irrevocable commercial letters of credit issued by a United States bank payable to the Treasurer of the United States or to the Government agency conducting the sale.
( c ) Credit or debit cards.
§ 776.9 Review procedures. ( a ) *Early public notice.* If a facility action at the contending site(s) could require construction in a wetland, public notice must be provided.
( b ) *Finding of no practicable alternative.* The Postal Service shall avoid construction located in a wetland unless it issues a finding of no practicable alternative. The facilities organization, in conjunction with the operations organization, or, for projects within the delegated authority of the Vice President, Area Operations, the operations organization, shall make a written determination that: ( 1 ) There is no practicable alternative to such construction; and
( 2 ) The proposed action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands.
( c ) *NEPA coordination.* If either an Environmental Impact Statement or an Environmental Assessment is required under the Postal Service's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations, the above review procedures must be incorporated into and evaluated in that document.
[Civ. No. 2174.

Fourth Appellate District.

November 18, 1938.]

#### COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE (a Body Politic and Corporate), Appellant, v. ARTHUR C. BROWN et al., Respondents.

*335Earl Redwine, District Attorney, for Appellant.

Miguel Estadillo for Respondents.

MARKS, J. 

This is a motion to dismiss the appeal or affirm the judgment on the ground that the appeal is frivolous, is taken for delay only, and that the' questions presented are so unsubstantial as to need no further argument.

In *Rasmussen*v. *Fresno Traction Co.,*11 Cal. App. (2d) 357, 358 [53 Pac. (2d) 1038], this court said:

> “We have frequently held that such a motion should not be granted where it appears, after examination of the opening brief and the papers filed in support of the motion, that the case cannot be decided without examining the entire record. (Brown v. *Gow,*126 Cal. App. 113 [14 Pac. (2d) 322] ; *Ross*v. *Mahoney,*134 Cal. App. 199 [25 Pac. (2d) 268]; *Barr*v. *Hall,*9 Cal. App. (2d) 426 [49 Pac. (2d) 1124].)”

One of the alleged errors on which plaintiff bases its appeal is that the attorney’s fee allowed to each owner on dismissal of the condemnation action against such owners is excessive. An examination of the opening brief of plaintiff and the papers filed on this motion satisfies us that to decide the substantiality of that question we must examine the.record. Under those circumstances we do not desire to depart from the foregoing rule which we have consistently followed. (Ure v. *Maggio Bros., Inc.,*22 Cal. App. (2d) 536 [71 Pac. (2d) 598] ; *Birkhofer*v. *Krumm,*24 Cal. App. (2d) 372 [75 Pac. (2d) 82].)

The motion is denied.

Barnard, P. J., and Griffin, J., concurred.
§ 102-40.70 Who is responsible for the care and handling of hazardous materials and property requiring special handling? ( a ) The holding agency is responsible for the care and handling of hazardous materials and property requiring special handling until the time the property has: ( 1 ) Completed the disposal process; and
( 2 ) Been transferred, donated, sold or destroyed, as authorized by this part. The nature of this material may require extra precautions, processes or equipment, thereby increasing the cost of care and handling. The costs associated with performing care and handling may be charged to the Federal agency or donation recipient in accordance with § 102-40.95.
( b ) When transferring personal property to another federal agency, failure to disclose hazards or special handling requirements may result in the transferring agency being liable for additional costs incurred by the recipient agency, when authorized by applicable law and policy.