alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 0

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 0 appear at 73 FR 73 FR 54947, Sept. 24, 2008.

#### § 0.52 Certifications under 18 U.S.C. 3503.

The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Rights Division and his Deputy Assistant Attorney Generals are each authorized to exercise or perform the functions or duties conferred upon the Attorney General by section 3503 of title 18, U.S. Code, to certify that the legal proceeding, in which a motion to take testimony by deposition is made, is against a person who is believed to have participated in an organized criminal activity, where the subject matter of the case or proceeding in which the motion is sought is within the cognizance of the Civil Rights Division pursuant to § 0.50.

[Order No. 452-71, 36 FR 2601, Feb. 9, 1971]
PUBLIC LAW 114–15—MAY 22, 2015 129 STAT. 199 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 651: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 161 (2015): 

Apr. 28, 29, considered and passed House. 

May 11, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 114–15 

114th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 820 Elmwood 

Avenue in Providence, Rhode Island, as the ‘‘Sister Ann Keefe Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SISTER ANN KEEFE POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 820 Elmwood Avenue in Providence, Rhode 

Island, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Sister Ann Keefe 

Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Sister Ann Keefe Post Office’’. 

Approved May 22, 2015. 

May 22, 2015 

[H.R. 651] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLAWS
#### Martin *v.*Dix *et al.*

Fish, C. J.

1. Wliei-e letters of administration have been granted by the court of ordinary having jurisdiction upon the estate- of a decedent, asín case of intestacy, and' subsequently a will of the decedent is propounded! and admitted to probate, this does not ipso facto render void a. sale of land of the decedent by the administrator before the propounding of the will for probate and under an order of the ordinary, duly granted, authorizing such sale. Patton’s Appeal, 31 Pa. St. 465; Kit*482tredge *v.*Folsom, 8 N. H. 98; Woerner’s American Law of Administration (2d ed.), §§ 266, 268.

May 11, 1910.

Ejectment. Before Judge Whipple. Ben Hill superior court,

August *25,*1909.

*D. E. Griffin, Hal Lawson,*for plaintiff in error.

*Haygood & Cutts,*contra.

2. Such an order of sale could not be collaterally attacked in an action of ejectment brought by the legatees under the will, after its probate, by showing that the administrator knew of the existence of the will when he applied for appointment, and fraudulently concealed it, and obtained the appointment on the ground that there was an intestacy, and that the purchaser at the sale also had notice of the existence of the will. Fraud in the procurement of the order for sale as administrator, and notice on the part of the purchaser, may be available in proper proceedings to set aside such order and sale, but they can not avail to destroy the judgment of the ordinary and the sale thereunder, upon a mere collateral attack in an ejectment suit by persons claiming as legatees. *Davie*v. *McDaniel,*47 *Ga. 195; Bailey*v. *Ross, 68 Ga. 735; Medlin & Sundy*v. *Downing Lumber Co.,*128 *Ga.*115 (57 S. E. 232).

3. The rule above announced is emphasized in the present case, where the ordinary allowed the will to be probated and appointed as executor the person named therein as such (who was the same person that had previously been appointed as administrator), but denied a separate application for an order to revoke the former grant of administration.

4. The fact that the denial of the application for revocation referred to in the preceding lieadnote was carried to the superior court by appeal, and that the nominated executor and formerly appointed administrator died, would not alter the rule above laid down. A judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, which is not invalid on its face, can not be collaterally attacked merely because the person in whose favor it was rendered has died or been dismissed from the office of administrator, which he held at the time of its grant. *Whitley Grocery Co.*v. *Jones,*128 *Ga.*791 (58 S. E. 623).

5. As the pi'inciples above announced are controlling in the case, it is unnecessary to specifically deal with the several grounds of the motion for a new trial. *Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

www.nasa.gov

The Apollo 11 Telemetry Data Recordings: 

A Final Report
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

à
15
16
17
18
19
### SUBCHAPTER II—STANDARDS FOR ELECTRIC UTILITIES
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection  with the  Quarterly  Report of  Contemporary  Solutions,
Inc.,  on Form  10-QSB for the  period  ending  June 30,  2006 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "REPORT"),  the
undersigned, B. Stephen Bailey, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that to the best of my
knowledge and belief:

         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 result of  operations of the
Company.


Date: July 24, 2006


/s/ B. Stephen Bailey
B. Stephen Bailey
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 51 (Wednesday, March 16, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 14372]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6099]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest Resource Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest Resource Advisory 
Committee will conduct a meeting in Salt Lake City, Utah. The committee 
is meeting as authorized under the Secure Rural Schools and Community 
Self-Determination Act (Pub. L. 110-343) and in compliance with the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act. The purpose is to continue the review 
of project submittals.

DATES: The meeting will be held on March 31, 2011, from 3 p.m. to 5:30 
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Salt Lake County Government 
Center, Room S1002, 2001 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah. 
Written comments should be sent to Loyal Clark, Uinta-Wasatch-Cache 
National Forest, 88 West 100 North, Provo, Utah 84601. Comments may 
also be sent via e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8ee2e8ede2effce5cee8fda0e8ebeaa0fbfd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5a363c39363b28311a3c29743c3f3e742f29">[email protected]</span></a>, via facsimile to 801-342-
5144.
    All comments, including names and addresses when provided, are 
placed in the record and are available for inspection and copying. The 
public may inspect comments received at the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache 
National Forest, 88 West 100 North, Provo, Utah 84601.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Loyal Clark, RAC Coordinator, USDA, 
Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest, 88 West 100 North, Provo, Utah 
84601; 801-342-5117; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d9b5bfbab5b8abb299bfaaf7bfbcbdf7acaa"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cba7ada8a7aab9a08badb8e5adaeafe5beb8">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting is open to the public. The 
following business will be conducted: (1) Review Forest Service project 
approval letter, (2) discuss travel budget, and (3) review new 
proposals. Persons who wish to bring related matters to the attention 
of the Committee may file written statements with the Committee staff 
before or after the meeting.

    Dated: March 9, 2011.
Cheryl Probert,
Deputy Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2011-6099 Filed 3-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 924 

AN ACT 

To amend the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 

to require training and education to teachers and other 

school employees, students, and the community about 

how to prevent, recognize, respond to, and report child 

sexual abuse in primary and secondary education. 

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

†S 924 ES

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Jenna Quinn Law’’. 

3 SEC. 2. CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE AWARENESS FIELD INITI4 ATED GRANTS. 

5 Section 105(a) of the Child Abuse Prevention and 

6 Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106(a)) is amended by adding 

7 at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘(8) CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE AWARENESS FIELD

9 INITIATED GRANTS.—The Secretary may award 

10 grants under this subsection to entities, for periods 

11 of up to 5 years, in support of field-initiated innova12 tion projects that advance, establish, or implement 

13 innovative evidence-based or evidence-informed child 

14 sexual abuse awareness and prevention programs 

15 by— 

16 ‘‘(A) improving student awareness of child 

17 sexual abuse, including how to recognize, pre18 vent, and safely report child sexual abuse; 

19 ‘‘(B) training teachers, school employees, 

20 and other mandatory reporters and adults who 

21 work with children in a professional or volun22 teer capacity, including with respect to recog23 nizing child sexual abuse and safely reporting 

24 child sexual abuse; or 

25 ‘‘(C) providing information to parents and 

26 guardians of students about child sexual abuse 
3 

†S 924 ES

1 awareness and prevention, including how to pre2 vent, recognize, respond to, and report child 

3 sexual abuse and how to discuss child sexual 

4 abuse with a child.’’. 

Passed the Senate September 17, 2020. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 
116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 924 

AN ACT 

To amend the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatprimary and secondary education. nize, respond to, and report child sexual abuse in and the community about how to prevent, recog- teachers and other school employees, students, ment Act to require training and education to
|  |  | Home | Jobs |          Fast Answers | Site Map | **Search** |  |
|--|--|-------------------------------------------------------------|--|
|  |  |
|  |
|  |  |
|  |

|  |
|--|
BEFORE THEY GET BEHIND THE WHEEL...

Make sure they understand the risks of drunk and drugged driving.

Let your children know it’s never okay to get behind the wheel of a motor vehicle while under the 

influence of alcohol or other drugs, and that getting in a car with someone who has been drinking or 

using drugs is also very dangerous. For tips on how—and when—to begin the conversation, visit 

www.underagedrinking.samhsa.gov

#TalkTheyHearYou PEP20-03-01-062
Exhibit 99.1


                            Certification Pursuant to
                  18 USC, Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to
                  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report of  Senior  Optician  Service,  Inc.
(Company) on Form 10-QSB  (Report) for the quarter ended June 30, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof. I, Donald Hill,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,  certify to
the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
ss. 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.

 /s/ Donald Hill
---------------------------
Donald Hill
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer

Dated: August 1, 2002
       --------------
Sára kesarěmale kišayya, 

hakíima kǒntókasi kišamma 

kišayya íteyokaala gooda.

Díímala koněye biyabbuna 

sabúunabbuna 

añgúsuyya sekende 20 si kólá.

Kosa kosanŭnalana attíšadalaná gadíibeya 

fomfona orgătabbu kotómáki

báttí fomfona orgatówá 

aškăwata aw gaašata fáda.

Mínd’arta konăbbu kokósanena wăge 

lŭša tokaadaki jermise kiiyyana săda 

(disinfectant) fuuda.

Weyena boboneyana 

udeyana kafádañkín 

dóggógóda.

Sára kiisarěma kwé koorala 

gǒddañkín dóoggógóda.

Agaare wăgala nokosimaala, 

bobonana udana kefǒna 

gadííba kofóda šíintanabbu 

kófó.

Haakada ulá míintade bădeda COVID-19 kokalenaye darídaala kakodădi.

Jermise waaga arteeta 

salăda kín dóggógóda

cdc.gov/coronavirus

316351-X May 9, 2020 12:01 AM
### §8343. Rulemaking on conflict of interest

#### (a) In general

In order to mitigate conflicts of interest, not later than 180 days after July 21, 2010, the Securities and Exchange Commission shall adopt rules which may include numerical limits on the control of, or the voting rights with respect to, any clearing agency that clears security-based swaps, or on the control of any security-based swap execution facility or national securities exchange that posts or makes available for trading security-based swaps, by a bank holding company (as defined in section 1841 of title 12) with total consolidated assets of $50,000,000,000 or more, a nonbank financial company (as defined in section 5311 of title 12) supervised by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, affiliate of such a bank holding company or nonbank financial company, a security-based swap dealer, major security-based swap participant, or person associated with a security-based swap dealer or major security-based swap participant.

#### (b) Purposes

The Securities and Exchange Commission shall adopt rules if the Commission determines, after the review described in subsection (a), that such rules are necessary or appropriate to improve the governance of, or to mitigate systemic risk, promote competition, or mitigate conflicts of interest in connection with a security-based swap dealer or major security-based swap participant's conduct of business with, a clearing agency, national securities exchange, or security-based swap execution facility that clears, posts, or makes available for trading security-based swaps and in which such security-based swap dealer or major security-based swap participant has a material debt or equity investment.

#### (c) Considerations

In adopting rules pursuant to this section, the Securities and Exchange Commission shall consider any conflicts of interest arising from the amount of equity owned by a single investor, the ability to vote, cause the vote of, or withhold votes entitled to be cast on any matters by the holders of the ownership interest, and the governance arrangements of any derivatives clearing organization that clears swaps, or swap execution facility or board of trade designated as a contract market that posts swaps or makes swaps available for trading.

(Pub. L. 111–203, title VII, §765, July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 1796.)

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

#### Definitions

For definitions of terms used in this section, see section 5301 of Title 12, Banks and Banking.
UNSCANNABLE ITEMS NOT INCLUDED IN THE 

AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE (AD) DMS DOCKET

DMS Docket Number: FAA-2007-0037

Directorate Identifier: 2007-NE-41-AD

Name/ Description of Unscannable Item

Rolls-Royce Deutschland Alert Service Bulletin TAY-72-A1524, Revision 1, dated 

September 1, 2006

________________________________________________________________

SERVICE INFORMATION MAY BE EXAMINED AT:

National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).

For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 

202 741 6030; or go to:

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html

or

Federal Aviation Administration

New England Region

Office of the Regional Counsel

12 New England Executive Park

Burlington, MA 01803

by appointment, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays
### Part D—Wilderness
### §3607. Enforcement

The Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating shall enforce the provisions of this chapter and any regulation issued under this chapter. For purposes of such enforcement, such provisions and regulations shall be considered to be provisions of the Act of 1976 [16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.] to which section 311(a), (b), (c), and (d) of the Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1861(a), (b), (c), and (d), respectively) apply.

(Pub. L. 97–389, title III, §308, Dec. 29, 1982, 96 Stat. 1953.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

For Act of 1976, referred to in text, see section 3601(1) of this title and References in Text note set out under section 3601 of this title.

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

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.
#### Holton, administratrix, *v.*Bene *et al.*

June 17, 1910.

Injunction, etc. Before Judge Whipple. Wilcox superior court.

November 20, 1909.

*Haygood & Gutts,*for plaintiff in error. *N. M. Patten, Hal Lawson, Bankston & Buckley, M. B. Cannon, J. T. Hill,*contra.

Atkinson, J.

The court did not commit error by ordering the consolidation of the case pending in tlie superior court on appeal from the court of ordinary (being a case founded upon an application by a widow on behalf of herself and minor child for a year’s support, to which objections were interposed by creditors) with another case pending in the superior court, instituted by the widow as administratrix upon the estate of her deceased husband, in which she prayed that the court of equity marshal the assets of the estate, etc., and that the case be referred to an auditor. Nor was it error to include, in the order of consolidation, direction that the whole case be referred for decision to an auditor, and to enjoin the widow from separately proceeding for a judgment.in the superior court in the suit for a year’s support while the consolidated case was pending before the auditor.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
# United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted November 17, 2010

Decided November 18, 2010

Before

JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge

JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge

KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge

No. 10

‐ 1164

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

‐ Appellee

,

v.

SALVADOR VACA,

Defendant

‐ Appellant

. Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Northern District of Illinois,

Eastern Division.

No. 08 CR 950

‐ 2

Blanche M. Manning,

Judge

.

O R D E R

Salvador Vaca brokered a deal for his coconspirator to purchase five kilograms of

cocaine from government informants. He later pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess with

intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846, and the district court

sentenced him to the statutory minimum of 120 months’ imprisonment. Vaca’s appointed

counsel on appeal has filed a motion to withdraw under Anders v. California

, 386 U.S. 738

(1967), contending that any challenge to Vaca’s sentence would be frivolous. Vaca has not

accepted our invitation to respond to counsel’s motion, see C IR R. 51(b). We limit our review

to the potential issues identified in counsel’s facially adequate brief. See United States v.

Schuh

, 289 F.3d 968, 973

‐ 74 (7th Cir. 2002). NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1No. 10

‐ 1164 Page 2

Because Vaca does not challenge his conviction or seek to withdraw his guilty plea,

counsel correctly forgoes discussion of challenges to the voluntariness of the plea or the

adequacy of the plea colloquy. See United States v. Knox

, 287 F.3d 667, 670

‐ 71 (7th Cir. 2002).

Counsel first considers whether Vaca could challenge the reasonableness of his

sentence. We agree with counsel that any such challenge would be frivolous. The district

court properly assessed Vaca’s guidelines range as 120

‐ 135 months’ imprisonment (based

on an offense level of 32 for distributing 5

‐ 15 kilograms of cocaine, a 3

‐ level decrease for

acceptance of responsibility, a criminal history category of III, and a statutory minimum of

120 months.) A sentence that is within the guidelines range is presumptively reasonable, see

Rita v. United States

, 551 U.S. 338, 350

‐ 51 (2007), and counsel identifies no possible challenge

to disturb the presumption.

Counsel next assesses whether the district court adequately considered the

sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), but properly concludes that any such challenge

would be frivolous. The court’s evaluation of the § 3553(a) factors noted that brokering a

deal for cocaine was a serious offense and that Vaca’s prior convictions were not merely

isolated and aberrant incidents. The court also noted Vaca’s significant substance

‐ abuse

history, his education, and the hardship his incarceration will present for his daughters.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the appeal is DISMISSED.
### §1107. Meetings and reports; inspection of records

The Commission shall hold at least one meeting every calendar year and shall submit an annual report to the United States and Canadian Governments on or before March 31 of each year, including a general statement of the operation for the previous year and the results of an independent audit of the financial operations of the Commission. The Commission shall permit inspection of its records by the accounting agencies of both the United States and Canadian Governments.

(Pub. L. 88–363, §8, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.)
2012

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey Printed on recycled paper

Maps of Estimated Nitrate and Arsenic

Concentrations for Basin-Fill Aquifers of the

Southwestern United States

By Kimberly R. Beisner, David W. Anning, Angela P. Paul, Tim S. McKinney, Jena M. Huntington, 

Laura M. Bexfield, and Susan A. Thiros

Scientific Investigations Map 3234

National Water-Quality Assessment Program