alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Office of Monitoring

Corrective Action Planning at a Glance

This resource provides an overview of the CAP Approved-In Progress process. Timeframes 

for each procedural step are individualized, based on approved flexibilities and extensions. 

This document guides the process for completing corrective action planning (CAP).

Your CAP has been approved. You are now in Phase II.

The CAP Specialist or Associate/Monitoring Officer assigned to your post-monitoring CAP

will be there to support email you to schedule a conference to review your finding(s) and 

develop a plan to support your organization in completing your CAP. Your organization's 

Authorized Representative for handling the CAP process will meet regularly with your CAP 

Specialist or Associate/Monitoring Officer to review the progress of each finding. Regular 

communication is necessary to close the CAP as quickly as possible. 

When you are ready to submit a document for review, contact your CAP Specialist or 

Associate/Monitoring Officer and they will provide you with a link to access your OneDrive 

Secure Folder. Once updates are received, the CAP Specialist or Associate/Monitoring 

Officer will review the document and provide feedback, if needed. Feedback will consist of 

the following results:

• If all CAP items are marked as Resolved, no further action is required.

• If there are any CAP items marked as Approved In-Progress, it is the expectation that 

additional work is required to fully implement your CAP actions, as planned. 

Status updates should include a completed AIP update template and all necessary

documentation demonstrating completion. Any planned actions not completed and 

Phase 1: CAP 

Intake

Phase II: CAP 

Review

Phase III: CAP 

Approved InProgress

Phase IV: 

Execute 

Corrective 

Action: 

Close Out

Step 1: CAP Meeting -

Grantee

Prioritize completion 

of Findings

Develop timeline for 

completion

Step 2: Track progress

Check-ins: As needed

Based on grantee 

progress

Adjust/Improve

Fine-tune the plan's timeline 

and/or documentation 

submitted

(may require multiple 

submissions)

Step 3: Evaluation 

Consultation/Final Review

Determination:

- All findings resolved or

- Additional documentation 

required
submitted to OM within six months of CAP approval may be subject to additional monitoring

and enforcement.
2

5

2

6

21

2

2

2

3

2

4

17

A

r

e

a

s

M

o

v

e

d

b

e

t

w

e

e

n

V

e

r

sio

n

1

2

a

n

d

R

e

s. 2

3-2

7

1

3

2

3

0

2

7

2

9

2

8

31

O

t

h

e

r

A

r

e

a

s

o

f

C

o

m

p

a

ris

o

n

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 173-23 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/02/2024 Page 1 of 1
No. 10-10990.

#### Rogers *v.*Lawler, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Huntingdon, et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 1:22-cv-23174-RKA Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2022 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Case 1:22-cv-23174-RKA Document 1-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/30/2022 Page 2 of 2
#### § 109-28.5000 Scope of subpart.

This subpart provides policies, principles, and guidelines to be used in the management of equipment held for future projects (EHFFP).
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 601

To amend title 10, United States Code, to change the effective date for

paid-up coverage under the military Survivor Benefit Plan from October

1, 2008, to October 1, 2003.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 4, 1999

Mr. SAXTON (for himself, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. BURTON of Indiana,

Mr. UNDERWOOD, Mr. ANDREWS, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. FILNER, Mr.

SCARBOROUGH, Mr. TIERNEY, and Mr. NORWOOD) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To amend title 10, United States Code, to change the effective date for paid-up coverage under the military Survivor Benefit Plan from October 1, 2008, to October

1, 2003.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 601 IH

1 SECTION 1. EFFECTIVE DATE FOR PAID-UP COVERAGE

2 UNDER SURVIVOR BENEFIT PLAN.

3 Section 1452(j) of title 10, United States Code, is

4 amended by striking ‘‘October 1, 2008’’ and inserting

5 ‘‘October 1, 2003’’.

Æ
DOT 36 - 13

Monday , April 22, 2013 Contact: Bill Mosley Tel.: (202) 366 - 4570 **DOT Reviewing**  **Request for Moratorium of Tarmac Delay Rule** The U.S. Department of Transportation is currently reviewing a motion filed by two airline industry associations, Airlines for America (A4A) and the Regional Airline Association (RAA), requesting a moratorium of the tarmac delay rule in li ght of sequestration - related furloughs by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) . The request was received on Friday , April 19. The Department will consider the views of all interested parties . Any party that would like its views on the issue considered may submit correspondence regarding the request to the docket. Correspondence should be su b mitted by

April 26 , at 5:00 p.m. The request is available on www.regulations.gov , docket DOT - OST - 2013 - 0084. ####
5 November 2015

368P12-2

#### Sherif A. Philips, M.D. v. Pitt County Memorial Hospital, Inc., Paul Bolin, M.D. and Ralph Whatley, M.D., Sanjay Patel, M.D. and Cynthia Brown, M.D.

1. Pit’s *Pro Se*PDR Under N.C.G.S. § 7A-31 (COA14-1372)

1. Denied

2. Pit’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Decision of COA

2. Denied
#### § 105-68.440 What method do I use to communicate those requirements to participants?

To communicate the requirement, you must include a term or condition in the transaction requiring the participants' compliance with subpart C of this part and requiring them to include a similar term or condition in lower-tier covered transactions.

[68 FR 66627, Nov. 26, 2003]
#### § 109-27.5106-1 Purpose.

The purpose of the precious metals pool is to recycle, at a minimum cost to pool participants, DOE-owned precious metals within the Department and to dispose of DOE-owned precious metals that are excess to DOE needs. However, if the pool is unable to accept any potential precious metal return, the using activity will dispose of the precious metals through the disposal process specified in subchapter H of the FPMR/FMR and this regulation.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DEC EMBER 1 , 2017

NO. 03

- 17

- 00086

- CV

Stanley Asher Wigley, Appellant

v.

Shannon Medical Center a/k/a Shanno n West Texas Memorial Hospital;

and Emmette Flynn, M.D., Appellee s

APP EAL FROM THE 340TH DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, FI ELD, AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the final judgment rendered by the tr i a l court

. Having reviewed the

record and the parties’ arguments, the C ourt holds that there was no reversible error in the

judgment . Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial court’s judgment

. A ppellant shall pay all costs

relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
§ 105-56.006 Petition for pre-offset hearing. ( a ) The employee may request a pre-offset hearing by filing a written petition with the appropriate program official indicated in the pre-offset notice, within 15 days of receipt of the written notice. The petition must state why the employee believes GSA's determination concerning the existence and/or amount of the debt is in error, set forth any objections to the involuntary repayment schedule, and, if the employee is seeking an oral hearing, set forth reasons for an oral hearing. The timely filing of a petition will suspend the commencement of collection proceedings.
( b ) The employee's petition or statement must be signed and dated by the employee.
( c ) Petitions for hearing made after the expiration of the 15-day period may be accepted if the employee can show that the delay was because of circumstances beyond his or her control or because of failure to receive notice of the time limit.
( d ) If the employee timely requests a pre-offset hearing or the timeliness is waived, the appropriate program official must— ( 1 ) Promptly notify the CBCA and arrange for a hearing official (see § 105-56.003(m) of this subpart). The hearing official will notify the employee whether he or she may have an oral or a “paper hearing,” i.e., a review on the written record (see 31 CFR 901.3(e)); and
( 2 ) Provide the hearing official with a copy of all records on which the determination of the debt and any involuntary repayment schedule are based.
( e ) If an oral hearing is to be held, the hearing official will notify the appropriate program official and the employee of the date, time, and location of the hearing. The debtor may choose to have the hearing conducted in the hearing official's office located at 1800 M Street NW., 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20036, at another location designated by the hearing official, or by telephone. The debtor and any witnesses are responsible for any personal expenses incurred to arrive at a hearing official's office or other designated location (see § 105-56.007(c)). All telephonic charges incurred during a hearing will be the responsibility of GSA.
( f ) If the employee later elects to have the hearing based only on the written submissions, notification must be given to the hearing official and the appropriate program official at least 3 days before the date of the oral hearing. The hearing official may waive the 3-day requirement for good cause.
( g ) If either party, without good cause as determined by the hearing official, does not appear at a scheduled oral hearing, the hearing official will make a determination on the claim which takes into account that party's position as presented in writing only.
[68 FR 68752, Dec. 10, 2003, as amended at 78 FR 29247, May 20, 2013]
No. 10-10924.

#### Jenkins *v.*LaValley, Superintendent, Great Meadow Correctional Facility.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certio-rari denied.
§ 105-68.740 Are suspension proceedings formal? ( a ) Suspension proceedings are conducted in a fair and informal manner. The suspending official may use flexible procedures to allow you to present matters in opposition. In so doing, the suspending official is not required to follow formal rules of evidence or procedure in creating an official record upon which the official will base a final suspension decision.
( b ) You as a respondent or your representative must submit any documentary evidence you want the suspending official to consider.
No. 11-8390.

#### Sanchez *v.*Scribner, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
124 STAT. 2850 PUBLIC LAW 111–269—OCT. 12, 2010 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 3553: 

SENATE REPORTS: No. 111–299 (Comm. on Indian Affairs). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 156 (2010): 

Apr. 20, considered and passed House. 

Sept. 27, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 111–269 

111th Congress 

An Act 

To exclude from consideration as income under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 amounts received by a family from 

the Department of Veterans Affairs for service-related disabilities of a member 

of the family. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Indian Veterans Housing Opportunity Act of 2010’’. 

SEC. 2. EXCLUSION FROM INCOME. 

Paragraph (9) of section 4 of the Native American Housing 

Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4103(9)) 

is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: 

‘‘(C) Any amounts received by any member of the 

family as disability compensation under chapter 11 of title 

38, United States Code, or dependency and indemnity compensation under chapter 13 of such title.’’. 

Approved October 12, 2010. 

25 USC 4101 

note. 

Indian Veterans 

Housing 

Opportunity Act 

of 2010. 

Oct. 12, 2010 

[H.R. 3553] 


anorris on DSK5R6SHH1PROD with PUBLIC LAWS
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

  <ARTICLE>         5
  <LEGEND>
  This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
  statements of operations for the three months and nine months ended
  September 30, 2000 and 1999 (unaudited) and the balance sheets dated
  September 30, 2000 and December 31, 1999 (unaudited) and is qualified in
  its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
  </LEGEND>
  <MULTIPLIER>      1

  <S>                         <C>        <C>
  <PERIOD-TYPE>               9-MOS
  <FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       Dec-31-2000
  <PERIOD-START>                          Jan-01-2000
  <PERIOD-END>                            Jun-30-2000
  <CASH>                                       37,436
  <SECURITIES>                                    -0-
  <RECEIVABLES>                                   -0-
  <ALLOWANCES>                                    -0-
  <INVENTORY>                                     -0-
  <CURRENT-ASSETS>                             37,436
  <PP&E>                                          -0-
  <DEPRECIATION>                                  -0-
  <TOTAL-ASSETS>                               81,409
  <CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           -0-
  <BONDS>                                         -0-
  <PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           -0-
  <PREFERRED>                                     -0-
  <COMMON>                                    314,080
  <OTHER-SE>                                 <232,671>
  <TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 81,409
  <SALES>                                         -0-
  <TOTAL-REVENUES>                             74,539
  <CGS>                                           -0-
  <TOTAL-COSTS>                                   -0-
  <OTHER-EXPENSES>                             94,588
  <LOSS-PROVISION>                                -0-
  <INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              -0-
  <INCOME-PRETAX>                                 -0-
  <INCOME-TAX>                                    -0-
  <INCOME-CONTINUING>                             -0-
  <DISCONTINUED>                              <20,049>
  <EXTRAORDINARY>                                 -0-
  <CHANGES>                                       -0-
  <NET-INCOME>                                <20,049>
  <EPS-BASIC>                                  0.00
  <EPS-DILUTED>                                   -0-


</TABLE>
#### § 955.2 Initiation of appeals.

An appeal must be initiated by the filing of a notice of appeal (or equivalent). See § 955.1(c)(4). The notice of appeal must be in writing and must be filed within the time specified by applicable law.

[80 FR 31304, June 2, 2015]
<PAGE>
 
                                   EXHIBIT 21

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                   State or Other
                                                   Jurisdiction of   Percentage
                                                    Incorporation    Ownership
                                                   ---------------   ----------
<S>                                                <C>               <C>
Parent
------

Patapsco Bancorp, Inc.                                 Maryland          --


Subsidiary (1)
----------    

The Patapsco Bank                                      Maryland         100%


Subsidiaries of The Patapsco Bank (1)
---------------------------------    

PFSL Holding Corp.                                     Maryland         100%
</TABLE> 

-------------------------
(1)  The assets, liabilities and operations of the subsidiaries are included in
     the consolidated financial statements contained in the Annual Report to
     Stockholders attached hereto as Exhibit 13.
#### § 105-68.325 What happens if I do business with an excluded person in a covered transaction?

If as a participant you knowingly do business with an excluded person, we may disallow costs, annul or terminate the transaction, issue a stop work order, debar or suspend you, or take other remedies as appropriate.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 22-cv-23171-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

ARBITRADE LTD.;

CRYPTOBONTIX INC.;

TORY R.J. HOGG;

JAMES L. GOLDBERG;

STEPHEN L. BRAVERMAN;

MAX W. BARBER;

SION TRADING FZE,

Defendants.

________________________________/

ORDER ON DEFAULT PROCEDURES

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon a sua sponte examination of the record. On 

February 8, 2023, the Court entered an Order on Default Procedures in which it ordered Defendants 

to respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint by or before February 15, 2023. ECF No. [43]. Subsequently 

on February 15, 2023, Defendant Max W. Barber (“Defendant”) filed a Motion for Extension of 

Time to Respond to the Complaint. ECF No. [56]. The Court granted in part the requested 

extension of time as to Defendant, setting a new response date of March 2, 2023. See ECF No. 

[57]. To date, Defendant has failed to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint. Accordingly, 

it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that 

1. Plaintiff shall submit a Motion for Entry of Clerk’s Default with respect to 

Defendant no later than March 17, 2023, that includes the certificate of 

service indicating that notice of this Order was sent to Defendant, including 

Case 1:22-cv-23171-BB Document 69 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/13/2023 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 22-cv-23171-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes

2

the address or addresses to which it was sent. Plaintiff’s failure to file a

Motion for Entry of Clerk’s Default within the specified time may result in

dismissal without prejudice and without further notice as to Defendant.

2. Plaintiff is directed to serve a copy of this Order upon Defendant.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on March 10, 2023.

_________________________________

BETH BLOOM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to:

Counsel of Record

Max W Barber

1028 S 1900 E

Salt Lake City, UT 84108-1861

Pro Se

Case 1:22-cv-23171-BB Document 69 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/13/2023 Page 2 of 2
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-14-0001325

23-MAR-2015

09:36 AM
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 1:22-cv-24066-KMM

GRACE, INC.; ENGAGE MIAMI, INC.; 

SOUTH DADE BRANCH OF THE NAACP; 

MIAMI-DADE BRANCH OF THE NAACP; 

CLARICE COOPER; YANELIS VALDES;

JARED JOHNSON; ALEXANDRA 

CONTRERAS; and STEVEN MIRO

Plaintiffs,

v.

CITY OF MIAMI,

 Defendant.

/

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO APPEAR 

PRO HAC VICE, CONSENT TO DESIGNATION AND REQUEST TO

ELECTRONICALLY RECEIVE NOTICES OF ELECTRONIC FILING

THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on the Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice for 

Julia Markham-Cameron, Consent to Designation, and Request to Electronically Receive Notices 

of Electronic Filing (the “Motion”), pursuant to the Rules Governing the Admission, Practice, Peer 

Review, and Discipline of Attorneys in the United States District Court for the Southern District of 

Florida and Section 2B of the CM/ECF Administrative Procedures. This Court having considered 

the motion and all other relevant factors, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

The Motion is GRANTED. Julia Markham-Cameron may appear and participate in this 

action on behalf of Plaintiffs. The Clerk shall provide electronic notification of all electronic filings 

to Julia Markham-Cameron, at Julia.Markham-Cameron@dechert.com. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at , Florida, this __ day of 2023.

 United States District Judge

Copies furnished to: All Counsel of Record

Case 1:22-cv-24066-KMM Document 113-2 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/14/2023 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6157

RICKY LAFAYETTE MURRAY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JEFFREY D. YOUNGS, Official Capacity; J. BENJAMIN APLIN; SYMMES W. CULBERTSON; FLETCHER N. SMITH, JR.; DAWN V. KOFFS KEY; SUSAN M. JOHNSTON, all defendants in their individual capacity, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. David C. Norton, District Judge. (9:06-cv-03137-DCN) Submitted: May 10, 2007 Decided: May 15, 2007 Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ricky Lafayette Murray, Appellant Pro Se. Tommy Evans, Jr., SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PROBATION, PAROLE & PARDON SERVICE, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Ricky Lafayette Murray appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Murray v. Youngs , No. 9:06-cv-03137-DCN (D.S.C. Jan. 5, 2007). 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.

AFFIRMED