alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 14 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.14
                                          Agreed to May 22, 2019        

                     One Hundred Sixteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and nineteen

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR EVENT TO CELEBRATE BIRTHDAY OF 
              KING KAMEHAMEHA I.

    (a) Authorization.--Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center 
is authorized to be used on June 9, 2019, for an event to celebrate the 
birthday of King Kamehameha I.
    (b) Preparations.--Physical preparations for the conduct of the 
event described in subsection (a) shall be carried out in accordance 
with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Architect of the 
Capitol.
Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
**Enhancing SBIRT Utilization Among Underserved Populations in Bronx, N.Y. and Surrounding Urban Areas: A Lehman College Training Initiative for Social Work Students and Medical Residents**

This purpose of this project is to increase the usage of SBIRT in healthcare and social service settings in impoverished, underserved areas of the Bronx, NY and surrounding urban communities. This will be accomplished by training 150 master’s (MSW) and 300 bachelor’s (BA) social work students at Lehman College, and 72 medical residents at Bronx-Lebanon Hospital’s Pediatric Ambulatory Care Clinic in SBIRT over a three-year period. Most of the trainees will be expected to perform SBIRT in their internships and medical residency settings, and their use of SBIRT will be evaluated over time. Training social work students at Lehman College will have a considerable effect on the use of SBIRT in the Bronx. The bachelor’s social work program is one of the largest in the country, and Lehman College’s master’s social work program is the only MSW program in the Bronx. Furthermore, Bronx-Lebanon Hospital is a major medical center serving one of the poorest urban areas in the country. Training medical residents in the pediatric clinic will result in far more adolescents and young adults in the Bronx being screened and treated for substance problems. Both the social work students and the medical residents are ethnically diverse, matching the populations of the surrounding Bronx communities. The population of the Bronx in 2010 was 54% Hispanic and 30% Black (NYC Dept. of Planning, 2013), with 56% of the population reporting a language other than English spoken at home (US Census Bureau, 2013). Lehman College is a federally designated Hispanic-serving institution, with about 40% of the social work students fluent in Spanish. The importance of increasing Bronx social workers’ and physicians’ ability to use SBIRT is of paramount importance, as the rate of hospitalizations in the Bronx for drug problems is the highest of any county in New York State (NYS Dept. of Health, 2013). 

Project Director:

Evan Senreich, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Social Work

Lehman College, City University of New York

evan.senreich@lehman.cuny.edu

Phone: (212)-642-8594

Fax: (718)-960-7402
§ 41.3 Definitions. As used in this regulation, the term: ( a ) *Executive Order* means Executive Order 12250, titled “Leadership and Coordination of Nondiscrimination Laws,” issued November 2, 1980.
( b ) *Section 504* means section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law 93-112, as amended by the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1974, Public Law 93-516, 29 U.S.C. 794.
( c ) *Agency* means a Federal department or agency that is empowered to extend financial assistance.
( d ) *Recipient* means any State or its political subdivision, any instrumentality of a State or its political subdivision, any public or private agency, institution, organization, or other entity, or any person to which Federal financial assistance is extended directly or through another recipient, including any successor, assignee, or transferee of a recipient, but excluding the ultimate beneficiary of the assistance.
( e ) *Federal financial assistance* means any grant, loan, contract (other than a procurement contract or a contract of insurance or guaranty), or any other arrangement by which the agency provides or otherwise makes available assistance in the form of: ( 1 ) Funds;
( 2 ) Services of Federal personnel; or
( 3 ) Real and personal property or any interest in or use of such property, including: ( i ) Transfers or leases of such property for less than fair market value or for reduced consideration; and
( ii ) Proceeds from a subsequent transfer or lease of such property if the Federal share of its fair market value is not returned to the Federal Government.
( f ) *Facility* means all or any portion of buildings, structures, equipment, roads, walks, parking lots, or other real or personal property or interest in such property.
[43 FR 2132, Jan. 13, 1978. Redesignated and amended at 46 FR 40686, 40687, Aug. 11, 1981]
#### § 401.86 Record of proceedings.

A record of the proceedings and evidence at each hearing shall be made by a qualified stenographer designated by the Executive Director. Where demanded by the applicant, objector, or any other person who is a party to these proceedings, or where deemed necessary by the Hearing Officer, the testimony shall be transcribed. In those instances where a transcript of proceedings is made, two copies shall be delivered to the Commission. The applicant, objector, or other persons who desire copies shall obtain them from the stenographer at such price as may be agreed upon by the stenographer and the person desiring the transcript.
§ 42.211 Resumption of suspended funds. ( a ) Payment of suspended funds made available under the JSIA or the Juvenile Justice Act shall resume only if— ( 1 ) Such State government or unit of general local government enters into a compliance agreement signed by the Director of OJARS in accordance with § 42.209;
( 2 ) Such State government or unit of general local government: ( i ) Complies fully with the final order or judgment of a Federal or State court, if that order or judgement covers all matters raised by the Director of OJARS in the notice pursuant to § 42.208, or
( ii ) Is found to be in compliance with section 815(c)(1) of the JSIA by such court;
( 3 ) After a hearing, the Director of OJARS, pursuant to § 42.213, finds that noncompliance has not been demonstrated; or
( 4 ) An administrative law judge has determined, under § 42.212, that it is likely that the State government or unit of local government will prevail on the merits.
( b ) Full compliance with a court order, for the purposes of paragraph (2) of this section, includes the securing of an agreement to comply over a period of time, particularly in complex cases or where compliance would require an extended period of time for implementation.
Exhibit 21

                      Subsidiaries of the Registrant
                           As of March 17, 1997

Royal Oak Mines Inc. (Amalgamated in the province of Ontario)

- 10502 Newfoundland Ltd. (Incorporated in the province of
  Newfoundland; 100% owned)

- 934962 Ontario Inc. (Incorporated in the province of Ontario;
  100% owned)

- 3199493 Canada Inc. (Incorporated in Canada; 100% owned)

- Arctic Precious Metals, Inc., doing business as Royal Oak
  Mines (USA) Inc. (Incorporated in the state of Nevada; 100%
  owned)
  -    Oz Investments, Inc. (Incorporated in the state of
       Washington; 100% owned)

- Beaverhouse Resources Ltd. (Incorporated in the province of
  Ontario; 100% owned)

- Consolidated Professor Mines Limited (Amalgamated in the
  province of Ontario; 81% owned)

- El Condor Resources Ltd. (Continued in the province of
  Ontario; 100% owned)

- Kemess Mines Inc. (Formerly Geddes Resources Limited,
  incorporated in the province of Ontario; 100% owned)

- Northbelt Yellowknife Gold Mines Ltd. (Incorporated in the
  province of Ontario; 72% owned)

- Ronnoco Gold Mines Limited (Incorporated in the province of
  Ontario;  89% owned)

- Royal Eagle Exploration Inc. (Incorporated in the province of
  Ontario; 60% owned)
  -    First Eagle Holdings, Inc. (Incorporated in the state of
       Nevada;  100% owned)

- Royal Oak Hope Brook Ltd. (Incorporated in the province of
  Ontario; 100% owned)

- Royal Oak Timmins Ltd. (Incorporated in the province of
  Ontario; 100% owned)

- Royal Oak Yellowknife Ltd. (Incorporated in the province of
  Ontario; 100% owned)

- St. Philips Resources Inc. (Continued in the province of
  Ontario; 100% owned)
  -    Stork Ventures Ltd. (Incorporated in the province of British
       Columbia; 100% owned)
  -    V.A.B. 19965 Holdings Ltd. (Incorporated in the province of
       British Columbia; 100% owned)

- Witteck Development Inc. (Incorporated in the province of
  Ontario; 100% owned)
NUMBER 13-15-00449-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

CALVIN WAYNE MCCLAIN, Appellant,

v.

DIANA ALAMAR MCCLAIN, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 430th District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Calvin Wayne McClain, appealed a judgment entered by the 430th 

District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas. On November 2, 2015, the Clerk of this Court 

notified appellant, in accordance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c), that we 

would dismiss this appeal unless the $205.00 filing fee was paid. See TEX. R. APP. P. 
2

42.3(c). Appellant has not responded to the notice from the Clerk or paid the $205.00 

filing fee. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5, 12.1(b).

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s failure to pay 

the filing fee, is of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. See id. 42.3(b),(c). 

Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

10th day of December, 2015.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Release No. 85787 / May 6, 2019

Admin. Proc. File No. 3-18219

In the Matter of 

NEXT GALAXY CORP. and

NOVAMEX ENERGY, INC.

NOTICE THAT INITIAL DECISION HAS BECOME FINAL

The time for filing a petition for review of the initial decision in this proceeding has 

expired. No such petition has been filed by Next Galaxy Corp. or Novamex Energy, Inc., and 

the Commission has not chosen to review the decision on its own initiative.

Accordingly, notice is hereby given, pursuant to Rule 360(d) of the Commission's Rules 

of Practice,1that the initial decision of the administrative law judge has become the final 

decision of the Commission with respect to Next Galaxy Corp. and Novamex Energy, Inc.2The 

order contained in that decision is hereby declared final. The initial decision ordered that, 

pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrations of each class 

of registered securities of Next Galaxy Corp. and Novamex Energy, Inc., are revoked. The 

revocations are effective as of May 7, 2019.

For the Commission, by the Office of the General Counsel, pursuant to delegated 

authority.

Vanessa A. Countryman

 Acting Secretary

 

1

 17 C.F.R. § 201.360(d).

2

 Next Galaxy Corp., Novamex Energy, Inc., Occidental Dev. Grp., Inc., and Sable Nat. Res. 

Corp., Initial Decision Release No. 1341 (Dec. 21, 2018), 2018 WL 6722764. The Central Index 

Key numbers are: 1466739 for Next Galaxy Corp.; and 1365748 for Novamex Energy, Inc.
#### Rock Island Butter Company, Respondent, v. James Rowland, Appellant.

Appeal dismissed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                       2,616,465
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,133,855
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    346,799
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,097,059
<PP&E>                                      22,670,282
<DEPRECIATION>                              18,220,026
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,213,149
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,953,322
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    339,407
<COMMON>                                     2,687,211
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,173,613
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,213,149
<SALES>                                     16,489,067
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,781,913
<CGS>                                       14,552,687
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               17,368,221
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               354,156
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (586,308)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    23,322
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (609,630)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (609,630)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.02)
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Administrative Proceedings Rulings

Release No. 6859 / July 28, 2022

Administrative Proceeding

File No. 3-18483

In the Matter of

Timothy C. Scarpino

Order Following

Third Status Report

The Division of Enforcement submitted a third status report noting no 

substantive change to the status of the related action, which remains pending. 

The Division recommends that I continue to defer setting a procedural

schedule in this matter and proposes submitting a further status report by 

September 30, 2022, or sooner as events warrant.

I ADOPT the Division’s proposal. The Division’s next status report is due 

September 30, 2022. 

/s/ James E. Grimes

Chief Administrative Law Judge
#### § 40.16 Denial of certification.

If the Attorney General finds that the grievance procedure is not in substantial compliance with the standards promulgated herein or is no longer fair and effective, the Attorney General shall deny certification and inform the applicant in writing of the area or areas in which the grievance procedure or the application is deemed inadequate.

[Order No. 1955-95, 60 FR 13903, Mar. 15, 1995]
WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT THE

HUBZone PROGRAM

The HUBZone program fuels the growth of small 

businesses in historically underutilized business 

zones (HUBZones) by providing certification 

for preferential access to federal contracts. The 

federal government has a goal to award at least 

3 percent of all federal contracting dollars to 

HUBZone-certified small businesses each year.

HUBZone certification qualifies you to:

• Bid on contracts reserved for HUBZone

businesses.

• Receive 10 percent price evaluation preference

in full and open competition procurements.

HUBZone Program Qualifications

A HUBZone firm must: 

• Be a small business according to SBA size

standards.

• Be at least 51 percent owned by U.S. citizens OR

be a business owned by:

• Indian Tribal Government

• Alaska Native Corporation

• Community Development Corporation

• Native Hawaiian Organization

• Small Agricultural Cooperative

• Have a principal office located in a HUBZone.

• Have at least 35 percent of its employees living

in a HUBZone.

Full qualification criteria can be found in Title 

13 Part 126 Subpart B of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR).

View location eligibility: 

maps.certify.sba.gov/hubzone/map
HUBZone 

Certification 

1. Review program

criteria and application

instructions at sba.gov/

hubzone.

2. Make sure you have a

SAM.gov account.

3. Register for an SBA

Connect account at

connect.sba.gov and

request access to the

HUBZone portal. View

the instructional video.

4. Apply for HUBZone

certification in the

HUBZone portal.

5. Check your email

for time-sensitive

instructions to

electronically verify

your application within

2 business days.

6. Submit all requested

supporting

documentation within

3 business days; your

submission cannot be

assigned for eligibility

review until all required

documents are

submitted.

Getting the Most Out of the 

HUBZone Certification 

Market Your Business to Federal Buyers

• Become familiar with government

contracting requirements and procedures.

• Identify and reach out to federal buyers in

your niche market.

Take Advantage of SBA’s Resources 

• Receive coaching and training about business

plans, marketing, government contracting,

and financing through SBA’s website and

network of partners.

• Gain access to further contracting

opportunities by combining the HUBZone

certification with other certifications for which

you qualify, such as 8(a), WOSB, and VOSB.

Utilize the SBA Mentor-Protégé Program

• Enhance capabilities through mentor

support.

• Form a joint venture which allows you

to compete for contracts as a certified

HUBZone enterprise.

Learn about recent improvements to the 

HUBZone program and read our detailed 

FAQ at sba.gov/hubzone.
§ 2.81 Reparole decisions. ( a ) If the prisoner is not serving a new, parolable D.C. Code sentence, the Commission's decision to grant or deny reparole on the parole violation term shall be made by reference to the reparole guidelines at § 2.21. The Commission shall establish a presumptive or effective release date pursuant to § 2.12(b), and conduct interim hearings pursuant to § 2.14.
( b ) If the prisoner is eligible for parole on a new D.C. Code felony sentence that has been aggregated with the prisoner's parole violation term, the Commission shall make a decision to grant or deny parole on the basis of the aggregate sentence, and in accordance with the guidelines at § 2.80.
( c ) If the prisoner is eligible for parole on a new D.C. Code felony sentence but the prisoner's parole violation term has not commenced (*i.e.,* the warrant has not been executed), the Commission shall make a single parole/reparole decision by applying the guidelines at § 2.80. The Commission shall establish an appropriate date for the execution of the outstanding warrant in order for the guidelines at § 2.80 to be satisfied. In cases where the execution of the warrant will not result in the aggregation of the new sentence and the parole violation term, the Commission shall make parole and reparole decisions that are consistent with the guidelines at § 2.80.
( d ) All reparole hearings shall be conducted according to the procedures set forth in § 2.72, and may be combined with the holding of a revocation hearing if the prisoner's parole has not previously been revoked. If the prisoner is serving a period of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of his parole by the D.C. Board of Parole, the Commission shall consider all available and relevant information concerning the prisoner's conduct while on parole, including any allegations of criminal or administrative violations left unresolved by the Board, pursuant to the procedures applicable to initial hearings under § 2.72 and § 2.19(c). The same procedures shall apply in the case of any new information concerning criminal or administrative violations of parole presented to the Commission for the first time following the conclusion of a revocation proceeding that resulted in the revocation of parole and the return of the offender to prison.
[65 FR 45888, July 26, 2000, as amended at 66 FR 37137, July 17, 2001]
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 7 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 7

 Authorizing the printing of the 26th edition of the pocket version of 
                 the Constitution of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 28, 2019

   Mr. Blunt (for himself and Ms. Klobuchar) submitted the following 
       concurrent resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Authorizing the printing of the 26th edition of the pocket version of 
                 the Constitution of the United States.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring),

SECTION 1. POCKET VERSION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.

    (a) In General.--The 26th edition of the pocket version of the 
Constitution of the United States shall be printed as a Senate document 
under the direction of the Joint Committee on Printing.
    (b) Additional Copies.--In addition to the usual number, there 
shall be printed the lesser of--
            (1) 480,500 copies of the document, of which 255,500 copies 
        shall be for the use of the House of Representatives, 200,000 
        copies shall be for the use of the Senate, and 25,000 copies 
        shall be for the use of the Joint Committee on Printing; or
            (2) such number of copies of the document as does not 
        exceed a total production and printing cost of $226,250, with 
        distribution to be allocated in the same proportion as 
        described in paragraph (1), except that in no case shall the 
        number of copies be less than 1 per Member of Congress.
    (c) Distribution.--The copies of the document printed for the use 
of the House of Representatives and the Senate under subsection (a) 
shall be distributed in accordance with--
            (1) a distribution plan approved by the chair and ranking 
        minority member of the Committee on House Administration of the 
        House of Representatives, in the case of the copies printed for 
        the use of the House of Representatives; and
            (2) a distribution plan approved by the chair and ranking 
        minority member of the Committee on Rules and Administration of 
        the Senate, in the case of the copies printed for the use of 
        the Senate.
                                 <all>
```