alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §8742. Physical examination: employees engaged in hazardous occupations

(a) The Secretary of the Navy may provide for physical examination by civilians of employees engaged in hazardous occupations, where the professional services of the Medical Department are not available. The Secretary may compensate these civilians for their services, on a contract or fee basis, at the rates customary in the locality.

(b) The Secretary, to the extent he considers proper, may delegate the authority conferred by this section to any person in the Department of the Navy, with or without the authority to make successive redelegations.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 462, §7472; renumbered §8742, Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §807(d)(6), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1836.)

| Revised section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 7472 | 5 U.S.C. 415c. | Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 756, §2, 60 Stat. 853. |
| | 5 U.S.C. 412a. | Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 756, §39, 60 Stat. 858. |

In subsection (b) the words "except the authority to prescribe regulations" are omitted, since 5 U.S.C. 415c contains no authority for the Secretary of the Navy to prescribe regulations for the administration of that section.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 8742 was renumbered section 9272 of this title.

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–232 renumbered section 7472 of this title as this section.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2018 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–232 effective Feb. 1, 2019, with provision for the coordination of amendments and special rule for certain redesignations, see section 800 of Pub. L. 115–232, set out as a note preceding section 3001 of this title.
# C_2012138EN.01002403.xml

| 12.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/24

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 29 September 2011 — AJ v Commission

(Case F-80/10)

(Civil service - Officials - Promotion - Articles 43 and 45 of the Staff Regulations - Appraisal report - Manifest error of assessment - Statement of reasons)

(2012/C 138/48)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: AJ (Waterloo, Belgium) (represented by: S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Berscheid and C. Berardis-Kayser, Agents)

Re:

Application for annulment of the applicant’s appraisal report for the period from 1 January to 31 December 2008

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders AJ to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders AJ to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Commission.

---
SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

Having considered the petition, answer, reply, and appendices, 

we conclude that petitioner has not demonstrated that our intervention by 

way of extraordinary relief is warranted. Id.; Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 

P.2d at 851. Accordingly, we 

ORDER the petition DENIED. 

02e-tt.. \ 

Hardesty 

 J. 

Parraguirre 

cc: Hon. Gloria Sturman, District Judge 

Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP/Las Vegas 

Prince & Keating, LLP 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

2 

MEKEEMERE=3211211111EMBEI
### §1448. Effect of partial invalidity of chapter

If any provision of this chapter, or the application thereof to any person or circumstances, is held invalid, the remainder of the chapter, and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby.

(July 22, 1932, ch. 522, §28, 47 Stat. 740.)
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 on Form 10-QSB of Inverted Paradigms Corporation (the
Company), for the three and six months ended June 30,2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stewart York, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify, to my knowledge that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 780(d)); 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/ Stewart York       
|                       
|Chief Executive Officer

Dated: February 8, 2007

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Inverted Paradigms Corporation and will be retained by Inverted Paradigms Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
### §5461. Findings and purposes

#### (a) Findings

Congress finds the following:

(1) The proper functioning of the financial markets is dependent upon safe and efficient arrangements for the clearing and settlement of payment, securities, and other financial transactions.

(2) Financial market utilities that conduct or support multilateral payment, clearing, or settlement activities may reduce risks for their participants and the broader financial system, but such utilities may also concentrate and create new risks and thus must be well designed and operated in a safe and sound manner.

(3) Payment, clearing, and settlement activities conducted by financial institutions also present important risks to the participating financial institutions and to the financial system.

(4) Enhancements to the regulation and supervision of systemically important financial market utilities and the conduct of systemically important payment, clearing, and settlement activities by financial institutions are necessary—

(A) to provide consistency;

(B) to promote robust risk management and safety and soundness;

(C) to reduce systemic risks; and

(D) to support the stability of the broader financial system.

#### (b) Purpose

The purpose of this subchapter is to mitigate systemic risk in the financial system and promote financial stability by—

(1) authorizing the Board of Governors to promote uniform standards for the—

(A) management of risks by systemically important financial market utilities; and

(B) conduct of systemically important payment, clearing, and settlement activities by financial institutions;

(2) providing the Board of Governors an enhanced role in the supervision of risk management standards for systemically important financial market utilities;

(3) strengthening the liquidity of systemically important financial market utilities; and

(4) providing the Board of Governors an enhanced role in the supervision of risk management standards for systemically important payment, clearing, and settlement activities by financial institutions.

(Pub. L. 111–203, title VIII, §802, July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1802.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 111–203, title VIII, §814, July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1822, provided that: "This title [enacting this subchapter] is effective as of the date of enactment of this Act [July 21, 2010]."

#### Short Title

This subchapter known as the "Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010", see Short Title note set out under section 5301 of this title.
#### § 201.28 Duplicates of bonds or equivalents to be filed with Regional Directors.

Fully executed duplicates of bonds, trust fund agreements, and trust agreements maintained under the regulations in this part, and fully executed duplicates of all endorsements, amendments, riders, indemnity agreements, and other attachments thereto, and photographically reproduced copies of any letter of credit or amendment thereto, shall be filed with the Regional Director for the region in which the registrant, packer, or person applying for registration resides, or in the case of a corporation, where the corporation has its home office: *Provided,* that if such registrant, packer, or person does not engage in business in such area, the foregoing documents shall be filed with the Regional Director for the region in which the place of business of the registrant or packer or person is located.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0580-0015)

[56 FR 2128, Jan. 22, 1991, as amended at 68 FR 75388, Dec. 31, 2003; 88 FR 62696, Sept. 13, 2023]
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 8, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 12563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5147]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 1, 14, and 17

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0560]
RIN 0910-AG55


Amendments to General Regulations of the Food and Drug 
Administration; Confirmation of Effective Date

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is confirming the 
effective date of April 14, 2011, for the final rule that appeared in 
the Federal Register of November 30, 2010 (75 FR 73951). The direct 
final rule amends certain general regulations of FDA to include tobacco 
products, where appropriate, in light of FDA's authority to regulate 
these products under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control 
Act, by revising the Agency's regulations to require tobacco products 
to be subject to the same general requirements that apply to other FDA-
regulated products. This document confirms the effective date of the 
direct final rule.

DATES: Effective date confirmed: April 14, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerie A. Voss, Center for Tobacco 
Products, Food and Drug Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd., rm. 204G, 
Rockville, MD 20850, 1-877-CTP-1373.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of November 30, 2010 
(75 FR 73951), FDA solicited comments concerning the direct final rule 
for a 75-day period ending February 14, 2011. FDA stated that the 
effective date of the direct final rule would be on April 14, 2011, 60 
days after the end of the comment period, unless any significant 
adverse comment was submitted to FDA during the comment period. FDA did 
not receive any significant adverse comments.

    Authority:  Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and 
Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of 
Food and Drugs, 21 CFR parts 1, 14, and 17 are amended. Accordingly, 
the amendments issued thereby are effective.

    Dated: March 2, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-5147 Filed 3-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P
# C_2007069EN.01000301.xml

| 24.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/3

---

Taking of the oath by the new members of the Court of First Instance

(2007/C 69/05)

Appointed Judges at the Court of First Instance of the European Communities by decision of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Union of 1 January 2007 (1), for the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 August 2007 and the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 August 2010, respectively, Mr Chipev and Mr Ciucă took the oath before the Court on 12 January 2007.

1

---

(1)  OJ L 1, 4.1.2007, p. 19.

1

---
§ 13.29 Sanctions. ( a ) The ALJ may sanction a Person, including any party or Representative, for: ( 1 ) Failing to comply with an order, rule, or procedure governing the proceeding;
( 2 ) Failing to prosecute or defend an action; or
( 3 ) Engaging in other misconduct that interferes with the speedy, orderly, or fair conduct of the hearing.
( b ) Sanctions include but are not limited to those specifically set forth in paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of this section. Any such sanction will reasonably relate to the severity and nature of the failure or misconduct.
( c ) When a party fails to comply with an order, including an order for taking a deposition, the production of evidence within the party's control, or a request for admission, the ALJ may: ( 1 ) Draw an inference in favor of the requesting party with regard to the information sought;
( 2 ) In the case of requests for admission, deem each matter of which an admission is requested to be admitted;
( 3 ) Prohibit the party failing to comply with such order from introducing evidence concerning, or otherwise relying upon, testimony relating to the information sought; and
( 4 ) Strike any part of the pleadings or other submissions of the party failing to comply with such request.
( d ) If a party fails to prosecute or defend an action under this part begun by service of a notice of hearing, the ALJ may dismiss the action or may issue an Initial Decision imposition penalties and assessments.
( e ) The ALJ may refuse to consider any motion, request, response, brief or other Document that is not filed in a timely fashion.
### §1845. Repealed. Pub. L. 89–485, §9, July 1, 1966, 80 Stat. 240

Section, act May 9, 1956, ch. 240, §6, 70 Stat. 137, prohibited any subsidiary bank from lending to or investing in its parent holding company or a fellow subsidiary bank. See section 371c of this title.
### §1715i. Repealed. Pub. L. 86–372, title I, §108, Sept. 23, 1959, 73 Stat. 657

Section, act June 27, 1934, ch. 847, title II, §218, as added July 14, 1952, ch. 723, §8, 66 Stat. 603, authorized a credit for application fees paid in cases where an application for mortgage insurance under section 1743 of this title was received on or before March 1, 1950, and the mortgagee applied for insurance of a mortgage under section 1713 of this title with respect to the same property or project.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Filed 1/7/97 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. DERRICK LAW,

Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 96-1139 96-1155 96-1212 (D.C. Nos. 96-M-168, 96-M-631)

(D. Colo.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before PORFILIO, BALDOCK, and HENRY, Circuit Judges

.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of these appeals. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The c ases are therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.-2-

Because the notice of appeal in No. 96-1212 was fil ed after the date of the signing of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Pe nalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214 (Apr. 24, 1996), defendant must obtain a certificate of appealability, see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c); cf. United States v. Lopez , 100 F.3d 113, 117 (10th Cir. 1996) (holding that certificate of appealability is not required where notice of appeal was filed before Act was sig ned). Defendant has voluntarily withdrawn the sole issue in this appeal and, thus, the certificate of appealability is denied. In No. 96-1139, defendant appeals the district court’s denial of a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, wherein the districtcourt found no defect in defendant’s conviction for carrying a firearm in vi olation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) in the aftermath of Bailey v. United States , 116 S. Ct. 501 (1995). On de novo review, see United States v. Cox , 83 F.3d 336, 338 (10th Cir. 1996), we conclude that Bailey does not affect this case. “We see nothing in Bai ley that conflicts with our pre-Bailey ‘vehicular carrying’ line of ca ses.” United States v. Miller , 84 F.3d 1244, 1260 (10th Cir.), cert. denied , 117 S. Ct. 443 (1996). The district court’s denial of the § 2255 motion in this case is affirmed. Finally, in No. 96-1155, we find no error in the di strict court’s order striking defendant’s Special Appearance Demand to D ismiss for Lack of Federal Jurisdiction.-3-

The certificate of appealability in No. 96-1212 is denied, and the appeal is DISMISSED. The judgments of the United States Dist rict Court for the District of Colorado in No. 96-1139 and No. 96-1155 are AFFI RMED.

Entered for the Court

John C. Porfilio Circuit Judge
PRC Workshare Cost Avoidance Models

Last Update: 7/14/2022

Mail Category 2021 Annual Compliance Determination (ACD) Cost Model Approved Changes to the 2021 ACD Cost Model

QBRM Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-3)

File Name:

PRC-FY21-21 BRM.xlsx

First-Class Mail Letters and Cards, Mail Processing Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-3)

File Name:

PRC-FY21-10 FCM Letters.xlsx

First-Class Mail Letters, Collection Cost Estimates

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-8)

File Name:

UDCmodel21.xlsx

First-Class Mail Flats, Mail Processing Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-3)

File Name:

PRC-FY21-11 FCM flats.xlsx

USPS Marketing Mail

USPS Marketing Mail Letters, Mail Processing Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-4)

File Name:

FY21 USPS MM Letters Cost Model PRC.xlsx

USPS Marketing Mail Flats, Mail Processing Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-4)

File Name:

FY21 USPS MM Flats Cost Model PRC.xlsx

USPS Marketing Mail Parcels, Mail Processing Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-4)

File Name:

FY21 USPS MM Parcel Processing PRC.xlsx

USPS Marketing Mail, Destination Entry Cost Model

(USPS–FY21-13)

File Name:

USPS-FY21-13.MKTG.xlsx

Flats

Parcels

Regular Letters, Flats, and Parcels None

None

None

Letters

Presort Letters None

First-Class Mail

Presort Flats None

None

None

Single-Piece Letters and Cards None

Presort Letters and Cards

Page 1 of 2
PRC Workshare Cost Avoidance Models

Last Update: 7/14/2022

Mail Category 2021 Annual Compliance Determination (ACD) Cost Model Approved Changes to the 2021 ACD Cost Model

Outside County Flats, Mail Processing Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-5)

File Name:

USPS-FY21-11 PER_OC.xlsx

Periodicals, Destination Entry Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-5)

File Name:

USPS-FY21-13.PER.xlsx

Media Mail-Library Mail, Mail Processing Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-6)

File Name:

MMLM Mail Processing FY 2021.xlsx

Bound Printed Matter, Mail Processing Cost Model

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-6)

File Name:

BPM Mail Processing FY 2021.xlsx

Delivery Cost Estimates by Shape

(PRC–LR–ACR2021-8)

File Name:

UDCmodel21.xlsx

Note: This directory is intended to be a summary of the Commission’s accepted workshare cost models. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of this directory.

In case of any conflict between this summary workshare cost models directory and the provisions in the Commission’s ACDs and analytical principle rulemaking dockets, 

the ACD and the rulemaking dockets will control.

Package Services

Other Workshare Cost Models

Delivery Cost Estimates for First-Class Mail, USPS 

Marketing Mail, and Periodicals

None

Bound Printed Matter Flats and Parcels None

Media Mail-Library Mail None

None

Periodicals 

Outside County Flats

Periodicals

None

Page 2 of 2
### §4588. Subpoena authority

#### (a) In general

In the course of or in connection with any administrative proceeding under this subpart, the Director shall have the authority—

(1) to administer oaths and affirmations;

(2) to take and preserve testimony under oath;

(3) to issue subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum; and

(4) to revoke, quash, or modify subpoenas and subpoenas duces tecum issued by the Director.

#### (b) Witnesses and documents

The attendance of witnesses and the production of documents provided for in this section may be required from any place in any State at any designated place where such proceeding is being conducted.

#### (c) Enforcement

The Director may bring an action or may request the Attorney General of the United States to bring an action in the United States district court for the judicial district in which such proceeding is being conducted, or where the witness resides or conducts business, or the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, for enforcement of any subpoena or subpoena duces tecum issued pursuant to this section. Such courts shall have jurisdiction and power to order and require compliance therewith.

#### (d) Fees and expenses

Witnesses subpoenaed under this section shall be paid the same fees and mileage that are paid witnesses in the district courts of the United States. Any court having jurisdiction of any proceeding instituted under this section by an enterprise may allow to any such party such reasonable expenses and attorneys fees as the court deems just and proper. Such expenses and fees shall be paid by the enterprise or from its assets.

(Pub. L. 102–550, title XIII, §1348, Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 3968; Pub. L. 110–289, div. A, title I, §1130(e)(2), (3)(E), July 30, 2008, 122 Stat. 2711.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2008—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 110–289, §1130(e)(3)(E), substituted "Director" for "Secretary" in introductory provisions and in par. (4).

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 110–289, §1130(e)(3)(E), substituted "Director" for "Secretary".

Pub. L. 110–289, §1130(e)(2), inserted "may bring an action or" before "may request".
### §4706. Selection of institutions

#### (a) Selection criteria

Except as provided in section 4712 of this title, the Fund shall, in its sole discretion, select community development financial institution applicants meeting the requirements of section 4704 of this title for assistance based on—

(1) the likelihood of success of the applicant in meeting the goals of its comprehensive strategic plan;

(2) the experience and background of the management team;

(3) the extent of need for equity investments, loans, and development services within the investment areas or targeted populations;

(4) the extent of economic distress within the investment areas or the extent of need within the targeted populations, as those factors are measured by objective criteria;

(5) the extent to which the applicant will concentrate its activities on serving its investment areas or targeted populations;

(6) the amount of firm commitments to meet or exceed the matching requirements and the likely success of the plan for raising the balance of the match;

(7) the extent to which the matching funds are derived from private sources;

(8) the extent to which the proposed activities will expand economic opportunities within the investment areas or the targeted populations;

(9) whether the applicant is, or will become, an insured community development financial institution;

(10) the extent of support from the investment areas or targeted populations;

(11) the extent to which the applicant is, or will be, community-owned or community-governed;

(12) the extent to which the applicant will increase its resources through coordination with other institutions or participation in a secondary market;

(13) in the case of an applicant with a prior history of serving investment areas or targeted populations, the extent of success in serving them; and

(14) other factors deemed to be appropriate by the Fund.

#### (b) Geographic diversity

In selecting applicants for assistance, the Fund shall seek to fund a geographically diverse group of applicants, which shall include applicants from metropolitan, nonmetropolitan, and rural areas.

(Pub. L. 103–325, title I, §107, Sept. 23, 1994, 108 Stat. 2172.)
### §462a. Repealed. Pub. L. 97–258, §5(b), Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1068

Section, act Apr. 24, 1917, ch. 4, §7, 40 Stat. 37, related to reserves against United States deposits.