alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 401.89 Action by the Commission. ( a ) The Commission will act upon the findings and recommendations of the Hearing Officer pursuant to law.
( b ) Commission Counsel shall assist the Commission with its review of the hearing record and the preparation of a Commission decision to the extent directed to do so by the Chairman.
( c ) The determination of the Commission will be in writing and shall be filed together with any transcript of the hearing, report of the Hearing Officer, objections thereto, and all plans, maps, exhibits and other papers, records or documents relating to the hearing. All such records, papers and documents may be examined by any person at the office of the Commission, and shall not be removed therefrom except temporarily upon the written order of the Secretary after the filing of a receipt therefor in form prescribed by the Secretary. Copies of any such records and papers may be made in the office of the Commission by any person, subject to such reasonable safeguards for the protection of the records as the Executive Director may require.
### §1129. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, §1000(a)(9) [title III, §3002(b)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–548, which related to cyberpiracy protections for individuals, was transferred to section 8131 of this title.
### §9062. Rule of construction

Nothing in this part shall be construed to allow the Secretary to provide relief to eligible businesses, States, and municipalities except in the form of loans, loan guarantees, and other investments as provided in this part and under terms and conditions that are in the interest of the Federal Government.

(Pub. L. 116–136, div. A, title IV, §4028, Mar. 27, 2020, 134 Stat. 497.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This part, referred to in text, was in the original "this subtitle", meaning subtitle A (§§4001–4029) of title IV of div. A of Pub. L. 116–136, known as the Coronavirus Economic Stabilization Act of 2020, which is classified principally to this part. For complete classification of subtitle A to the Code, see section 4001 of Pub. L. 116–136, set out as a Short Title note under section 9001 of this title, and Tables.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14101-14102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5933]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-72,740; TA-W-72,740A]


Bruss North America; Russell Springs, KY; Bruss North America; 
Orion, MI; Amended Revised Determination on Reconsideration

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended 
(``Act''), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a Revised 
Determination on Reconsideration on February 2, 2011, applicable to 
workers of Bruss North

[[Page 14102]]

America, Russell Springs, Kentucky. The workers are engaged in the 
production of automobile parts and component parts. The notice was 
published in the Federal Register on February 10, 2011 (76 FR 7590).
    At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm.
    New findings show that worker separations occurred during the 
relevant time period at the Orion, Michigan location of Bruss North 
America, Inc. The Orion, Michigan location served as the sales office 
for the production of automobile parts at the Russell Springs, Kentucky 
location of Bruss North America. The same factors that led to 
certification of the Russell Springs, Kentucky facility also led to 
worker separations at the Orion, Michigan location during the relevant 
time period. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this 
revised determination to include workers of the Orion, Michigan 
location of Bruss North America.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-72,740 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of Bruss North America, Russell Springs, Kentucky 
(TA-W-72,740) and Bruss North America, Orion, Michigan (TA-W-
72,740A), who became totally or partially separated from employment 
on or after October 31, 2008, through February 2, 2013, and all 
workers in the group threatened with total or partial separation 
from employment on the date of certification through two years from 
the date of certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment 
assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as 
amended.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 18th day of February 2011.
Michael W. Jaffe,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2011-5933 Filed 3-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
### §3391a. "Essential agricultural use" defined

For the purposes of section 3391 of this title, the term "essential agricultural use" shall—

(1) include use of natural gas in sugar refining for production of alcohol;

(2) include use of natural gas for agricultural production on set-aside acreage or acreage diverted from the production of a commodity (as provided under the Agricultural Act of 1949 [7 U.S.C. 1421 et seq.]) to be devoted to the production of any commodity for conversion into alcohol or hydrocarbons for use as motor fuel or other fuels; and

(3) for the 5-year period beginning on June 30, 1980, include use of natural gas in the distillation of fuel-grade alcohol from food grains or other biomass by facilities in existence on June 30, 1980, which do not have the installed capability to burn coal lawfully.

(Pub. L. 96–294, title II, §273, June 30, 1980, 94 Stat. 711.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Agricultural Act of 1949, referred to in par. (2), is act Oct. 31, 1949, ch. 792, 63 Stat. 1051, which is classified principally to chapter 35A (§1421 et seq.) of Title 7, Agriculture. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1421 of Title 7 and Tables.

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Biomass Energy and Alcohol Fuels Act of 1980 which is title II of the Energy Security Act, and not as part of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 which comprises this chapter.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 13623]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5738]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0447]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office 
of Management and Budget Approval; Medical Devices; Third Party Review 
Program Under the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a 
collection of information entitled ``Medical Devices; Third Party 
Review Program Under the Food and Drug Administration Modernization 
Act'' has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Daniel Gittleson, Office of 
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., 
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850, 301-796-5156, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ace8cdc2c5c9c082ebc5d8d8c0c9dfc3c2eccac8cd82c4c4df82cbc3da"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="470326292e222b69002e33332b2234282907212326692f2f3469202831">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of December 28, 2010 
(75 FR 81616), the Agency announced that the proposed information 
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44 
U.S.C. 3507. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays 
a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the 
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0375. 
The approval expires on February 28, 2014. A copy of the supporting 
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet 
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: March 8, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-5738 Filed 3-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5 the Court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under

the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-51218

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ROBERT LEE MORRISON,

Defendant-Appellant.

 

Appeals from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. A-00-CR-62-All-JN

 

September 27, 2001

Before GARWOOD, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Robert Lee Morrison appeals his conviction, following entry of

a guilty plea, for possession with intent to distribute more than

50 grams of crack cocaine. Morrison contends that his plea was

involuntary because he was not admonished at rearraignment of his

rights under Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), to have

the Government prove and the jury determine the drug quantity
2

beyond a reasonable doubt. Morrison contends that the superseding

information was fatally defective because it reported that he

committed the drug offense four months after he entered a plea to

the charge. Morrison contends that his attorney provided

ineffective assistance because counsel did not object to the lack

of an Apprendi admonishment and did not challenge the alleged

defective charging instrument.

We have reviewed the record and the briefs submitted by the

parties and hold that all requirements of Rule 11 were met in this

case. See Rule 11(c); United States v. Cuevas-Andrade, 232 F.3d

440, 444 (5th Cir. 2000). Moreover, any error would be harmless.

United States v. Reyna, 130 F.3d 104, 112 (5th Cir. 1997); United

States v. Coronado, 554 F.2d 166, 173 (5th Cir. 1977). We further

hold that Morrison has not shown reversible error in conjunction

with his claim that the obviously typographical date error in the

superseding information rendered the charging instrument void.

Berger v. United States, 55 S.Ct. 629, 630 (1935), overruled on

other grounds, Stirone v. United States, 80 S.Ct. 270 (1960);

Russell v. United States, 429 F.2d 237, 238 (5th Cir. 1970).

Finally, Morrison has not shown that counsel’s performance was

objectively unreasonable. See Strickland v. Washington, 104 S.Ct.

2052, 2065-68 (1984); United States v. Wilkes, 20 F.3d 651, 653

(5th Cir. 1994) (counsel not deficient for failing to raise legally

meritless claim). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court
3

is 

AFFIRMED.
# Typical Staff Positions and Job Descriptions

3
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Service Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dana S. Philbrook, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



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

This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-B (Item 601(b)(32))
promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933 (the Securities Act) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act). In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this certification (A) shall not
be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the
Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ DANA S. PHILBROOK  
|Dana S. Philbrook      
|Chief Financial Officer

May 12, 2006
### §6731. General application

This subchapter shall only apply to a mutual insurance company in a State which has not enacted a law which expressly establishes reasonable terms and conditions for a mutual insurance company domiciled in such State to reorganize into a mutual holding company.

(Pub. L. 106–102, title III, §311, Nov. 12, 1999, 113 Stat. 1417.)

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

#### Effective Date

Pub. L. 106–102, title III, §316, Nov. 12, 1999, 113 Stat. 1422, provided that: "This subtitle [subtitle B (§§311–316) of title III of Pub. L. 106–102, enacting this subchapter] shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 12, 1999]."
Editorial Note on Part 0
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 0 appear at 73 FR 73 FR 54947, Sept. 24, 2008.

§ 0.172 Authority: Federal tort claims. ( a ) *Delegation of authority.* Subject to the limitations set forth in paragraph (b) of this section, the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, the Commissioner of Federal Prison Industries, the Director of the United States Marshals Service, the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives shall have authority under section 2672 of title 28, United States Code, relating to the administrative settlement of Federal tort claims, to consider, ascertain, adjust, determine, compromise, and settle any claim involving their respective components, provided that any award, compromise, or settlement shall not exceed $50,000.
( b ) *Limitations on authority.* Any proposed award, compromise, or settlement under section 2672 of title 28, United States Code, must be referred to the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Division, or his delegee, when— ( 1 ) Because a significant question of law or policy is presented, or for any other reason, the head of the referring component is of the opinion that the proposed award, compromise, or settlement should receive the personal attention of the Assistant Attorney General or his delegee;
( 2 ) Two or more claims arise from the same subject matter and the total amount of any award, compromise, or settlement of all claims will or may exceed $50,000; or
( 3 ) The award, compromise, or settlement of a particular claim, as a practical matter, will or may control or adversely influence the disposition of other claims and the total settlement value of all claims will or may exceed $50,000.
( c ) Subject to the provisions of § 0.160, the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Division shall have authority to consider, ascertain, adjust, determine, compromise, and settle any other claim involving the Department under section 2672, of title 28, U.S. Code, relating to the administrative settlement of Federal tort claims.
[AG Order No. 3330-2012, 77 FR 26183, May 3, 2012]
# C_2013325EN.01002401.xml

| 9.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 325/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 September 2013 — Rubinetteria Cisal v Commission

(Case T-368/10) (1)

1

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted parties - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement - Coordination of price increases and exchange of sensitive business information - Concept of infringement - 2002 Leniency Notice - Cooperation - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Calculation of the fine - Inability to pay)

2013/C 325/39

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Rubinetteria Cisal (Alzo Frazione di Pella, Italy) (represented by: M. Pinnarò and P. Santer, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, A. Antoniadis and L. Malferrari, Agents, assisted by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2010) 4185 final of 23 June 2010 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case COMP/39.092 — Bathroom Fittings and Fixtures), and, in the alternative, for reduction of the fine imposed on the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Rubinetteria Cisal SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Rubinetteria Cisal SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 288, 23.10.2010.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 725 Considered and Passed Senate (CPS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 725

  To change the address of the postal facility designated in honor of 
                         Captain Humayun Khan.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 7, 2019

 Mr. Kaine (for himself and Mr. Warner) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To change the address of the postal facility designated in honor of 
                         Captain Humayun Khan.

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

SECTION 1. CAPTAIN HUMAYUN KHAN POST OFFICE.

    Section 1(a) of Public Law 115-347 (132 Stat. 5054) is amended by 
striking ``180 McCormick Road'' and inserting ``2150 Wise Street''.
                                 <all>
```
**Meeting with River Network on WQS Regulatory Revisions / Antidegradation**

**Logistics:** EPA Headquarters, 12/1/10, 11 am - 12 pm **Attendees:** River Network

– Merritt Frey . EPA OST - Heather Goss, Christina Christensen, Shari Barash **Topics:** 1. A lternatives analy sis: a) what is ‘feasible’ and b) timing of alternatives analy sis 2. Social/economic anal ys is, and River Network's work on a white paper 3. Tier 2 coverage (waterbody approach) 4. Tier 3 water identification process
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  About SBA 
-  Oversight and Advocacy 
-  Office of The National Ombudsman 
-  One Stop Shop For Small Business Compliance Act 2021 

## Section navigation

-  SBA locations 
-  Open government 
-  SBA Newsroom 
-  Work for SBA 
-  Organization 
-  Oversight and advocacy    -  Office of Hearings and Appeals 
  -  Office of Inspector General 
  -  Office of the National Ombudsman      -  One Stop Shop for Small Business Compliance Act 2021 
  -  Office of Advocacy 
-  Information in other languages 

# One Stop Shop for Small Business Compliance Act 2021
# Text for Public Service Announcement Script:

No one is fully prepared to deal with a disaster like [current disaster]. Disasters cause property damage and financial and other losses that can lead to emotional stress. There is hope.  Through door-to-door visits and outreach at community events, [program name] staff offer emotional support, education, and guidance.  The program is administered by [State] Mental Health Services in conjunction with other designated mental health agencies and community services in our State. All program services are free, and any individual, family, or business is eligible for assistance. [Program name] program runs through the anniversary of the disaster. ***If you have questions or need help, please call*** [program name and number]. [Insert program website if possible].
### §80b–20. Short title

This subchapter may be cited as the "Investment Advisers Act of 1940".

(Aug. 22, 1940, ch. 686, title II, §220, 54 Stat. 857.)

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

#### Short Title of 2019 Amendment

Pub. L. 115–417, §1, Jan. 3, 2019, 132 Stat. 5438, provided that: "This Act [amending sections 80b–3 and 80b–3a of this title] may be cited as the 'RBIC Advisers Relief Act of 2018'."

#### Short Title of 2010 Amendment

Pub. L. 111–203, title IV, §401, July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1570, provided that: "This title [enacting sections 80b–18b and 80b–18c of this title, amending sections 80b–2, 80b–3, 80b–3a, 80b–4, 80b–5, 80b–10, and 80b–11 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 77b and 80b–2 of this title] may be cited as the 'Private Fund Investment Advisers Registration Act of 2010'."

#### Short Title of 1996 Amendment

Pub. L. 104–290, title III, §301, Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3436, provided that: "This title [enacting section 80b–3a of this title, amending sections 80b–2, 80b–3, and 80b–18a of this title and section 1002 of Title 29, Labor, and enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 80b–2, 80b–3a, and 80b–10 of this title and section 1002 of Title 29] may be cited as the 'Investment Advisers Supervision Coordination Act'."
* Judge Duncan did not participate in consideration of this case. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-7785
TOMMY FARRAR, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LT. HODGE; OFFICER ELLIS; OFFICER CURTIS; LIEUTENANT ALFORD; LIEUTENANT MERIDITH; SERGEANT MCCORMICK; OFFICER DIPONTE, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:06-ct-03079-D) Submitted: August 21, 2008 Decided: September 10, 2008 Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and KING and DUNCAN, * Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Tommy Farrar, Appellant Pro Se. John A. Maxfield, COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE FOR THE COUNTY OF WAKE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Tommy Farrar appeals the district court’s order denying relief on 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. Farrar v. Hodge , No. 5:06-ct-03079-D (E.D.N.C. Nov. 27, 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