alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 60-20.7 Employment decisions made on the basis of sex-based stereotypes. Contractors must not make employment decisions on the basis of sex-based stereotypes, such as stereotypes about how males and/or females are expected to look, speak, or act. Such employment decisions are a form of sex discrimination prohibited by Executive Order 11246, as amended. Examples of discrimination based on sex-based stereotyping may include, but are not limited to: ( a ) Adverse treatment of an employee or applicant for employment because of that individual's failure to comply with gender norms and expectations for dress, appearance, and/or behavior, such as: ( 1 ) Failing to promote a woman, or otherwise subjecting her to adverse employment treatment, based on sex stereotypes about dress, including wearing jewelry, make-up, or high heels;
( 2 ) Harassing a man because he is considered effeminate or insufficiently masculine; or
( 3 ) Treating employees or applicants adversely based on their sexual orientation where the evidence establishes that the discrimination is based on gender stereotypes;
( b ) Adverse treatment of employees or applicants because of their actual or perceived gender identity or transgender status;
( c ) Adverse treatment of a female employee or applicant because she does not conform to a sex stereotype about women working in a particular job, sector, or industry; and
( d ) Adverse treatment of employees or applicants based on sex-based stereotypes about caregiver responsibilities. For example, adverse treatment of a female employee because of a sex-based assumption that she has (or will have) family caretaking responsibilities, and that those responsibilities will interfere with her work performance, is discrimination based on sex. Other examples of such discriminatory treatment include, but are not limited to: ( 1 ) Adverse treatment of a male employee because he has taken or is planning to take leave to care for his newborn or recently adopted or foster child based on the sex-stereotyped belief that women and not men should care for children;
( 2 ) Denying opportunities to mothers of children based on the sex-stereotyped belief that women with children should not or will not work long hours, regardless of whether the contractor is acting out of hostility or belief that it is acting in the employee's or her children's best interest;
( 3 ) Evaluating the performance of female employees who have family caregiving responsibilities adversely, based on the sex-based stereotype that women are less capable or skilled than their male counterparts who do not have such responsibilities; and
( 4 ) Adverse treatment of a male employee who is not available to work overtime or on weekends because he cares for his elderly father, based on the sex-based stereotype that men do not have family caregiving responsibilities that affect their availability for work, or that men who are not available for work without constraint are not sufficiently committed, ambitious, or dependable.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

 

Circuit Mediation Office Statistics 

2018 Calendar Year

(January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018) 

 

 

Appeals settled: 9 

• Patent: 8 

• Non-patent: 1 

Appeals not settled; mediation terminated: 12

• Patent: 12

• Non-patent: 0 

Success rate - overall (of appeals selected for mediation): 43% 

• Patent: 40% 

• Non-patent: 100%
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         283,238
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   84,080
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               395,174
<PP&E>                                         139,189
<DEPRECIATION>                                (55,761)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 912,565
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          186,580
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,875
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,382,076
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   725,985
<SALES>                                         77,054
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                77,054
<CGS>                                           47,618
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  993,117
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (5,960)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (957,721)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (957,721)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (957,721)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.25


</TABLE>
No. 11-5278.

#### Sacor-Quijiux *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Surface Transportation Board 

          - [STB Finance Docket No. 33891] 

Central Gulf Railway, Inc. (CGR), a noncarrier, has filed a verified notice of exemption under 49 CFR 1150.31 to lease certain rail lines from the Terminal Railway Alabama State Docks (TASD), an agency of the State of Alabama, and operate either directly or through the use of a contract agent approximately 0.46 miles of rail line. The rail lines to be leased are located in TASD's Frascati Yard in Mobile, AL. CGR will be leasing Track Nos. 1, 2, and 4, beginning at a point of interchange with TASD 90 feet east of Ezra Trice Boulevard and extending east 590 feet for Track Nos. 1 and 2 and, 1271 feet for Track No. 4. CGR certifies that its projected revenues will not exceed those that would qualify it as a Class III carrier. 

The transaction is scheduled to be consummated on or after June 30, 2000. 

                    If the notice contains false or misleading information, the exemption is void                     *ab initio*. Petitions to revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) may be filed at any time. The filing of a petition to revoke will not automatically stay the transaction.                 

An original and 10 copies of all pleadings, referring to STB Finance Docket No. 33891, must be filed with the Surface Transportation Board, Office of the Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K Street, NW, Washington, DC 20423-0001. In addition, one copy of each pleading must be served on Karl Morell, Esq., BALL JANIK, LLP, 1455 F Street, NW, Suite 225, Washington, DC 20005. 

Board decisions and notices are available on our website at “WWW.STB.DOT.GOV.” 

Decided: June 27, 2000.

By the Board, David M. Konschnik, Director, Office of Proceedings.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-16857 Filed 7-5-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4915-00-P
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DECEMBER 18, 2014

NO. 03-14-00428-CV

Lakecroft, Ltd. and Western Hemisphere Investments Corp., Appellants

v.

Randal H. Adams, Susan Adams, Hope Alcorta, Alfred Anderson, Janice Anderson, Brian 

Ash, Elizabeth Ash, Bent Bean, Stacey Bean, James Brady, Richard Byrd, Krin Byrd, 

Donald Carberry, Marcia Carberry, Bertrand Chartier, Joyce Claytor, Edwin Coinson, 

Denice Moran Coinson, Rocky Collette, Jennifer Collette, Sam Collette, Carol Ann 

Collette, Mike Crelin, Daniele Crelin, Henry W. De la Rosa, John Dettmer, Sally Dettmer, 

Melissa Duvall, Rachael V. East, Stephen Edlund, Christopher Ewing, Jack Fehrenbach, 

Ronald Fey, Grace Fey, Andrew T. Fiedler, Rhoda Fiedler, Donald Charles Fleming, Fresh 

Start Builders, David Glasscock, Gerald Gueldner, John Gueldner, Geraldine Gueldner, 

William Hagerman, Dianne Hagerman, Harve John Hagerty, Jacqueline Harris, Gary 

Holcomb, Lori Holcomb, Bill D. Hood, Dorothy Hood, John Hughes, Janice Hughes, 

Carmen Kane, Leonard Tumolo, Timothy Keith, Deborah Keith, Randy Kerner, Cynthia 

Kerner, David Lewis, Lan Lewis, Lori K. Lindsay, Lisa F. Landford, Esther Lucio, 

William T. Maurer, Julie McCollum as Trustee of the Frederick G. McCollum and Julie A. 

McCollum Revocable Living Trust, Katherine McDaniel, Gary Mercer, Vivian Mae 

Merrit, Dalton Mewis-Heddleston, Tami Mewis, Richard Miller, Jeanne Butler, Sharon 

Mooney, Terri Mooney, E.D. Morrison, Richard Morrison, Helen Elizabeth Morrison,

Kenneth W. Pape, Darlene Parsons, Larry Pratt, Robert Ragland, Bernard Charles Reck

and Anna Maria Reck, co-Trustees of the Bernard C. Reck and Anna M. Reck Revocable 

Living Trust, Rittiman Ranches LLC, Paul Rohler, Jennifer Rohler, Megan Rutledge, Earl 

Schacherl, Janice Schacherl, Josef Scherm, Lilia Scherm, Dorothy Schroeder, Marcus 

Schulte, Cheryl Schulte, Michael R. Stewart, Karen Stewart, Barbara Stuart, Rick Sutton,

Gabriela Sutton, Raul Tijerina, Nancy Talbott, Rob Q. Talbott, Jeff Turpin, Glenn Wash, 

Keith Weidner, Sunda Weidner, Ian Whitehead, David Willson, Phil Zaccaria, Terri 

Zaccaria, Edward Zeigle, and Susan Zeigle, Appellees

APPEAL FROM 274TH DISTRICT COURT OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND FIELD

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PEMBERTON

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the district court on June 16, 2014. Having 

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error 
in the district court’s judgment. Therefore, the Court affirms the district court’s judgment. The 

appellants shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
Editorial Note on Part 1
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 1.83 Applications for radio operator licenses. ( a ) Application filing procedures for amateur radio operator licenses are set forth in part 97 of this chapter.
( b ) Application filing procedures for commercial radio operator licenses are set forth in part 13 of this chapter. Detailed information about application forms, filing procedures, and where to file applications for commercial radio operator licenses is contained in the bulletin “Commercial Radio Operator Licenses and Permits.” This bulletin is available from the Commission's Forms Distribution Center by calling 1-800-418-FORM (3676).
[47 FR 53378, Nov. 26, 1982, as amended at 58 FR 13021, Mar. 9, 1993; 63 FR 68920, Dec. 14, 1998]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on July 20, 2006, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”, Portland Cement Association (“PCA” has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Humboldt Wedag, Inc., Norcross, GA has become an Associate Member.                

                    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and PCA intends                           ( print page 45582)                        to file additional written notification disclosing all changes to membership.                

                    On January 7, 1985, PCA filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 5, 1985 (50 FR 5015).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 4, 2006. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on June 2, 2006 (71 FR 32127).                

Patricia A. Brink,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 06-6779 Filed 8-8-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
§ 60-30.34 Conduct of hearing. ( a ) At the hearing, the Government shall be given an opportunity to demonstrate the basis for the request for sanctions and/or remedies, and the contractor shall be given an opportunity to show that the violation complained of did not occur and/or that good cause or good faith efforts excuse the alleged violations. Both parties shall be allowed to present evidence and argument and to cross-examine witnesses.
( b ) The hearing shall be informal in nature, and the Administrative Law Judge shall not be bound by formal rules of evidence.
#### § 24.50 Scope.

This subpart sets forth the technical requirements for use of the spectrum and equipment in the personal communications services.
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 10.2

                    FOURTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

     This Fourth Amendment to Employment Agreement (the "Amendment"), dated as
of the 1/st/ day of August, 2003 by and between COMFORCE Corporation
("COMFORCE") a Delaware corporation, and COMFORCE Operating, Inc. ("COI"), a
Delaware corporation that is wholly-owned by COMFORCE (COMFORCE and COI are
collectively referred to as the "Employer"), and Harry V. Maccarrone, a resident
of the State of New York ("Employee").

     WHEREAS, the parties entered into an Employment Agreement dated as of
January 1, 1999, which Employment Agreement was previously amended as of January
23, 2001, September 27, 2001 and July 1, 2002, pursuant to which Employer
formalized the terms upon which Employee is to be employed by Employer through
December 31, 2005 (as amended, the "Employment Agreement"); and

     WHEREAS, the parties desire to further amend the Employment Agreement as
herein provided.

     NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual obligations of
the parties contained herein, and for other valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as
follows:

     1.  The second sentence of Section 4(a)(ii) of the Employment Agreement is
hereby amended by adding the following additional proviso at the end thereof: ";
and, provided further, that, notwithstanding the foregoing, no such increase
shall be made to Employee's Base Salary for the 2003 calendar year."

     2.  All other provisions of the Employment Agreement shall remain in full
force and effect.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement on the day
and year first above mentioned.

                                        COMFORCE CORPORATION


                                        By:
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Its:

                                        COMFORCE OPERATING, INC.


                                        By:
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Its:

                                        EMPLOYEE

                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Harry V. Maccarrone
FORM 21. Application for Admission to the Bar Form 21 (p. 1) 

July 2020

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR

Instructions: Please review Fed. R. of App. P. 46 and Fed. Cir. R. 46 before 

submitting this application. The applicant must sign the oath of admission with a 

handwritten signature; all other signatures must comply with Fed. Cir. R. 25(g)(2). 

Attach additional pages as needed.

Name:

Mailing Address:

Email:

I am hereby applying for admission to the bar of the United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit. My personal statement showing my eligibility is as follows:

I am admitted to practice before the highest court of these states:

State Date of Admission Bar Number

Additional pages attached.

I am admitted to practice before these federal courts:

Federal Court Date of Admission Bar Number

Additional pages attached.

I certify that I am not presently subject to discipline by another court. I will inform 

this court within 30 days of any disciplinary action taken against me by any court, 

and I will furnish the court with a copy of any disciplinary order.

Signature: 
FORM 21. Application for Admission to the Bar Form 21 (p. 2) 

July 2020

BASIS FOR ADMISSION

(Complete either the Motion of Sponsor or the Certification of Good Standing) 

MOTION OF SPONSOR

I, (name of 

sponsor), certify that I am a member of 

the bar of this court in good standing. I 

am satisfied that the applicant possesses 

the qualifications set forth by the 

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 

46(a) and hereby move the admission of 

the above attorney.

Date: 

Signature: 

CERTIFICATE OF GOOD 

STANDING

I have attached a certificate of good 

standing dated within 30 days of my 

submission of this application from one 

of the above-listed courts.

OATH OF ADMISSION

Instructions: Execute the oath unless arrangements have been made to have the 

oath administered in open court. Declarations/Affidavits will not be accepted in lieu 

of notarization. The notary’s seal must be visible and the commission expiration date 

must appear on the seal. 

I, , (applicant name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) 

that I will comport myself as an attorney and counselor of this court, 

uprightly and in accordance with the law, and that I will support the 

Constitution of the United States.

Date: Signature: 

Subscribed and sworn before me on: 

My Commission expires on this date: 

 Notary Signature: 

[NOTARY SEAL]
§ 27.56 Antenna structures; air navigation safety. A licensee that owns its antenna structure(s) must not allow such antenna structure(s) to become a hazard to air navigation. In general, antenna structure owners are responsible for registering antenna structures with the FCC if required by part 17 of this chapter, and for installing and maintaining any required marking and lighting. However, in the event of default of this responsibility by an antenna structure owner, the FCC permittee or licensee authorized to use an affected antenna structure will be held responsible by the FCC for ensuring that the antenna structure continues to meet the requirements of part 17 of this chapter. See § 17.6 of this chapter. ( a ) *Marking and lighting.* Antenna structures must be marked, lighted and maintained in accordance with part 17 of this chapter and all applicable rules and requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration. For any construction or alteration that would exceed the requirements of section 17.7 of this chapter, licensees must notify the appropriate Regional Office of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA Form 7460-1) and file a request for antenna height clearance and obstruction marking and lighting specifications (FCC Form 854) with the FCC, WTB, 1270 Fairfield Road, Gettysburg, PA 17325.
( b ) *Maintenance contracts.* Antenna structure owners (or licensees and permittees, in the event of default by an antenna structure owner) may enter into contracts with other entities to monitor and carry out necessary maintenance of antenna structures. Antenna structure owners (or licensees and permittees, in the event of default by an antenna structure owner) that make such contractual arrangements continue to be responsible for the maintenance of antenna structures in regard to air navigation safety.
§ 101.77 Public safety licensees in the 1850-1990 MHz, 2110-2150 MHz, and 2160-2200 MHz bands. ( a ) In order for public safety licensees to qualify for a three year mandatory negotiation period as defined in § 101.69(d)(2), the department head responsible for system oversight must certify to the ET licensee requesting relocation that: ( 1 ) The agency is a Police licensee, a Fire Licensee, or an Emergency Medical Licensee as defined in § 90.7 of this chapter, or meets the eligibility requirements of § 90.20(a)(2) of this chapter, except for § 90.20(a)(2)(ii) of this chapter, or that it is a licensee of other part 101 facilities licensed on a primary basis under the eligibility requirements of part 90, subpart B of this chapter; and
( 2 ) The majority of communications carried on the facilities at issue involve safety of life and property.
( b ) A public safety licensee must provide certification within thirty (30) days of a request from a ET licensee, or the ET licensee may presume that special treatment is inapplicable. If a public safety licensee falsely certifies to an ET licensee that it qualifies for the extended time periods, this licensee will be in violation of the Commission's rules and will subject to appropriate penalties, as well as immediately subject to the non-public safety time periods.
[61 FR 29695, June 12, 1996, as amended at 62 FR 12758, Mar. 18, 1997; 62 FR 18936, Apr. 17, 1997; 71 FR 29842, May 24, 2006]