alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §410ggg–2. World War II home front study

The Secretary shall conduct a theme study of the World War II home front to determine whether other sites in the United States meet the criteria for potential inclusion in the National Park System in accordance with section 100507 of title 54.

(Pub. L. 106–352, §4, Oct. 24, 2000, 114 Stat. 1372.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

In text, "section 100507 of title 54" substituted for "section 8 of Public Law 91–383 (16 U.S.C. 1a–5)" on authority of Pub. L. 113–287, §6(e), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3272, which Act enacted Title 54, National Park Service and Related Programs.
## IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

July 12, 2024 SC-2024-0372 Ex parte Donald Bishop PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: Donald Bishop v. Stateof Alabama) (Pickens Circuit Court: CC-08-11.67; Criminal Appeals CR2024-0197). CERTIFICATE OF JUDGMENT WHEREAS, the petition for writ of certiorari in the above referenced cause has been duly submitted and considered by the Supreme Court of Alabama and the judgment indicated below was entered in this cause on July 12, 2024: Writ Denied. No Opinion. Stewart, J. -- Parker, C.J., and Wise, Sellers, and Cook, JJ., concur. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Rule 41, Ala. R. App. P., IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's judgment in this cause is certified on this date. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, unless otherwise ordered by this Court or agreed upon by the parties, the costs of this cause are hereby taxed as provided by Rule 35, Ala. R. App. P.

I, Megan B. Rhodebeck, certify that this is the record of the judgment of the Court, witness my hand and seal.

Clerk, Supreme Court of Alabama
### §369. Charges assessable against bath attendants and masseurs and physicians prescribing use of hot waters

The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to assess and collect from physicians who desire to prescribe the hot waters from the Hot Springs National Park reasonable fees for examination and registration; and he is also authorized to assess and collect from bath attendants and masseurs operating in bathhouses receiving hot water from the park reasonable annual charges to cover the cost of physical examinations.

(June 5, 1920, ch. 235, §1, 41 Stat. 918; Mar. 4, 1921, ch. 161, §1, 41 Stat. 1407; Mar. 2, 1931, ch. 365, 46 Stat. 1462.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

As originally enacted, this section authorized reasonable charges against physicians, including fees for examination and registration. It also authorized collection of reasonable charges from bath attendants and masseurs, and provided that the moneys received should be used in the protection and improvement of the park.

#### Amendments

1931—Act Mar. 2, 1931, struck out provision that moneys received from the assessment and collection of fees were to be used for the protection and improvement of the park.

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

#### Change of Name

"Hot Springs National Park" substituted in text for "Hot Springs Reservation" pursuant to act Mar. 4, 1921.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6270

WARREN C. ROBINSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL

BUREAU OF PRISONS; FMC BUTNER; WARDEN BEELER,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-02-320-H)

Submitted: April 17, 2003 Decided: April 24, 2003

Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Warren C. Robinson, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Warren C. Robinson appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Robinson v.

United States Dep’t of Justice, No. CA-02-320-H (E.D.N.C. Jan. 22,

2003). 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
全球健康警报:COVID-19 

详细信息请参见: CS 315649-AW July 31, 2020 8:18 PMwww.cdc.gov/COVIDtravel

与他人保持 6 英尺/2 米的距离。 佩戴口罩。 勤洗手。

您可能在旅行中暴露于 COVID-19。

注意您的健康以发现症状。即使没有症状,您也可以将病毒传播给他人。

保护他人免于生病:

密切接触活动会使您有暴露于 COVID-19 的风险。

如果您认为自己在外出旅行中可能已经暴露,请在旅行后的 14 天内格外注意: ű 尽量待在家里。

ű 避免待在人的周围,特别是那些会因 COVID-19 而患严重疾病的高风险人群。

ű 考虑进行 COVID-19 检测。

For information about COVID-19 and how to monitor your health after travel, open your cell phone 

camera and scan this code: 

Для получения информации о COVID-19 и о том, как контролировать 

состояние вашего здоровья после путешествия, включите камеру на 

вашем мобильном телефоне и отсканируйте этот код:

Pour obtenir des informations relatives à COVID-19 et à la manière de surveiller votre santé après 

un voyage, ouvrez la caméra de votre téléphone portable et scannez le code suivant :

코로나바이러스감염증-19(COVID-19) 및 여행 후 건강 상태를 모니터

링하는 방법에 대한 정보를 보려면, 휴대폰 카메라로 이 코드를 스캔

하십시오:

COVID-19 ,

, :

新型コロナウイルス感染症(COVID-19)に関する情報、

および旅行後の自身の健康状態を観察する方法について

は、携帯電話のカメラを起動して、このコードをスキャ

ンしてください:

Untuk mendapatkan maklumat mengenai COVID-19 dan cara mengawasi kesihatan anda selepas 

perjalanan, buka kamera telefon bimbit anda dan imbas kod ini:

Para obter informações sobre o COVID-19 e como monitorar sua saúde após a 

viagem, abra a câmera do seu celular e digitalize este código:

Para obtener información sobre el COVID-19 y cómo monitorear su salud después de 

un viaje, abra la cámara de su teléfono y escanee este código: 

有关COVID-19 的信息以及如何在旅行后监测您的健康状

况,请打开手机摄像头并扫描此二维码:

Per informazioni sulla COVID-19 e su come monitorare la Sua salute dopo il viaggio, 

apra la fotocamera del Suo cellulare e scansioni questo codice:
### §3343. Construction with fishery conservation and management provisions

#### (a) Consistency

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as affecting the provisions of title III of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act [16 U.S.C. 1851 et seq.] as it applies with respect to fishery management plans and their application to any fishery, except that the Pacific Fishery Management Council shall ensure that existing and future fishery management plans are consistent with any recommended program approved under section 3311 of this title and any enhancement plan under subchapter III.

#### (b) Fleet mobility

The Secretary of Commerce in coordination with the Pacific Fishery Management Council in its salmon management plan shall ensure that the fishing effort reduction that results from the fleet adjustment program of subchapter IV and the license moratorium of the State of Washington is not replaced by new fishing effort from outside such State.

(Pub. L. 96–561, title I, §142, title II, §238(b), Dec. 22, 1980, 94 Stat. 3286, 3300; Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, §101(a) [title II, §211(b)], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009, 3009–41.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, referred to in subsec. (a), is Pub. L. 94–265, Apr. 13, 1976, 90 Stat. 331. Title III of the Act is classified generally to subchapter IV (§1851 et seq.) of chapter 38 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1801 of this title and Tables.

#### Amendments

1996—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 104–208 substituted "Magnuson-Stevens Fishery" for "Magnuson Fishery".

1980—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 96–561, §238(b), substituted "Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act" for "Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976".

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

#### Effective Date of 1996 Amendment

Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title I, §101(a) [title II, §211(b)], Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009, 3009–41, provided that the amendment made by that section is effective 15 days after Oct. 11, 1996.

#### Effective Date of 1980 Amendment

Pub. L. 96–561, title II, §238(b), Dec. 22, 1980, 94 Stat. 3300, provided that the amendment made by that section is effective 15 days after Dec. 22, 1980.
### §426e. Lands acquired declared national battlefield; name

Upon the ceding of jurisdiction by the legislature of the State of Tennessee and the report of the Attorney General of the United States that a perfect title has been acquired, the lands acquired under the provisions of sections 426 to 426j of this title, together with the area already inclosed within the national cemetery at the battlefield of Stones River and the Government reservation in said battlefield upon which is erected a large monument to the memory of the officers and soldiers of General Hazen's brigade who fell on the spot, are declared to be a national battlefield, to be known as the Stones River National Battlefield.

(Mar. 3, 1927, ch. 374, §6, 44 Stat. 1400; Pub. L. 86–443, §2, Apr. 22, 1960, 74 Stat. 82.)

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

#### Change of Name

"Stones River National Battlefield" and "national battlefield" substituted in text for "Stones River National Park" and "national park", respectively, in view of redesignation of Stones River National Military Park as Stones River National Battlefield by Pub. L. 86–443. See section 426l of this title.
### §410bbb–4. General management plan

Within three years after the date funds are made available therefor and concurrent with the national landmark study referenced in section 410bbb–1(b)(3) of this title, the Secretary, in consultation with the New Orleans Jazz Commission, shall prepare a general management plan for the historical park. The plan shall include, but need not be limited to—

(1) a visitor use plan indicating programs and facilities associated with park programs that will be made available to the public;

(2) preservation and use plans for any structures and sites that are identified through the historic landmark study for inclusion within the historical park;

(3) the location and associated cost of public facilities that are proposed for inclusion within the historical park, including a visitor center;

(4) identification of programs that the Secretary will implement or be associated with through cooperative agreements with other groups and organizations;

(5) a transportation plan that addresses visitor use access needs to sites, facilities, and programs central to the purpose of the historical park;

(6) plans for the implementation of an archival system for materials, objects, and items of importance relating to the history of jazz; and

(7) guidelines for the application of cooperative agreements that will be used to assist in the management of historical park facilities and programs.

(Pub. L. 103–433, title XII, §1206, Oct. 31, 1994, 108 Stat. 4522.)
### §284j. Definitions

As used in this subchapter, the term—

(1) "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Interior.

(2) "Park" means the Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts established under this subchapter, including the Center.

(3) "Center" means the Filene Center in the Park. Such term includes all real property and fixtures which are within or directly related to the Filene Center.

(4) "Foundation" means the Wolf Trap Foundation for the Performing Arts organized pursuant to the District of Columbia Nonprofit Organization Act.

(Pub. L. 89–671, §11, as added Pub. L. 97–310, Oct. 14, 1982, 96 Stat. 1458; Pub. L. 107–219, §1(a)(1), Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1330.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The District of Columbia Nonprofit Corporation Act, referred to in par. (4), is Pub. L. 87–569, Aug. 6, 1962, 76 Stat. 265, which is not classified to the Code.

#### Amendments

2002—Par. (2). Pub. L. 107–219 substituted "Wolf Trap National Park for the Performing Arts" for "Wolf Trap Farm Park".
### §17e. Repealed. Pub. L. 113–287, §7, Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3272

Section, act May 26, 1930, ch. 324, §6, 46 Stat. 382, related to care and removal of indigents; disposition of dead persons. See section 104903 of Title 54, National Park Service and Related Programs.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 10-1668

___________ William Simpson Edwards, * * Appellant, * * v. * * Ed O’Brian; Pradeep Sarswat, MD; * Durga Satyavola; Jones; Julie Pihl, * Nurse, RN; Susan Mangels, RN; * Appeal from the United States Natasha Whalen, RN; Kristen * District Court for the Towlerton, RN; Josaphin Watson, * Southern District of Iowa. RN; Dawn Hecox, RN; John Ault, * Warden; William Spersflage, Deputy * [UNPUBLISHED] Warden; Deb Nichols, Assistant * Security Warden; Rick Larkin, * Living Unit Counselor; Dennis * Brumbaugh, Unit Manager; Dave * DeGrange, ISP Grievance Officer; * Sheryl Lockwood, Central Grievance * Officer; Arthur Neu, IDOC Board * Member; Nancy Roth; Anthony * Aducey; Dave Ryner; State of Iowa; * Department of Corrections, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: August 26, 2010 Filed: September 3, 2010

___________ Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________1 The Honorable John A. Jarvey, United Stat es District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. -2- PER CURIAM. William Simpson Edwards appeals the district court’s 1 judgment granting defendants summary judgment, and denying Edwards’s motions for leave to amend his complaint and for an injunction, in his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Following careful de novo review, seeMason v. Corr. Med. Servs., Inc. , 559 F.3d 880, 884 (8th Cir. 2009) (summary judgm ent standard of re view), we find no basis for reversal. We also find that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint, see Popp Telcom v. Am. Sharecom, Inc. , 210 F.3d 928, 943 (8th Cir. 2000) (where amendment woul d likely result in burdens of additional discovery and delay to proceedings, court usually does not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend); or in denying Ed wards’s request for an injunction, see Hinz v. Neuroscience, Inc. , 538 F.3d 979, 986 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review); Bank One, Utah v. Guttau , 190 F.3d 844, 847 (8th Cir. 1999) (factors considered in ruling on request for permanent injunction). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

______________________________
KEITH B. BROWN

,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent.

___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 0907

Opinion filed April 8, 2015.

Petition for Writ of Prohibition

-- Original Jurisdiction

.

Keith B. Brown, pro se , Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for w rit of prohibition is denied on the merits.

ROWE, MARSTILLER, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
§ 2.75 Reconsideration proceedings. ( a ) ( 1 ) Following an initial or subsequent hearing, the Commission may— ( i ) Set an effective date of parole within nine months of the date of the hearing;
( ii ) Set a presumptive parole date at least ten months but not more than three years from the date of the hearing;
( iii ) Continue the prisoner to the expiration of sentence if the prisoner's mandatory release date is within three years of the date of the hearing;
( iv ) Schedule a reconsideration hearing at three years from the month of the hearing; or
( v ) Remand the case for a rehearing on the next available docket (but no later than 180 days from the date of the hearing) for the consideration of additional information.
( 2 ) *Exceptions.* ( i ) With respect to the rule on three-year reconsideration hearings. If the prisoner's current offense behavior resulted in the death of a victim and, at the time of the hearing, the prisoner must serve more than three years before reaching the minimum of the applicable guideline range, the Commission may schedule a reconsideration hearing at a date up to five years from the month of the last hearing, but not beyond the minimum of the applicable guideline range.
( ii ) With respect to youth offenders. Regardless of whether a presumptive parole date has been set, a reconsideration hearing shall be conducted every twelve months for a youth offender, and on the next available docket after the Commission is informed that the prisoner has completed his program plan.
( b ) When a rehearing is scheduled, the prisoner shall be given a rehearing during the month specified by the Commission, or on the docket of hearings immediately preceding that month if no docket of hearings is scheduled for the month specified.
( c ) At a reconsideration hearing, the Commission may take any action that it could take at an initial hearing. The scheduling of a reconsideration hearing does not imply that parole will be granted at such hearing.
( d ) Prior to a parole reconsideration hearing, the Commission shall review the prisoner's record, including an institutional progress report which shall be submitted 60 days prior to the hearing. Based on its review of the record, the Commission may grant an effective date of parole without conducting the scheduled hearing.
( e ) Notwithstanding a previously established reconsideration hearing, the Commission may reopen any case for a special reconsideration hearing, as provided in § 2.28, upon the receipt of new and significant information concerning the prisoner.
[65 FR 70664, Nov. 27, 2000, as amended at 67 FR 57945, Sept. 13, 2002; 69 FR 5274, Feb. 4, 2004]
should not be admitted at her disciplinary hearing. The hearing panel

chair denied petitioner's motion in limine, but stated that all evidence must still be "relevant and . . . pass any other evidentiary objections which may be raised at the time of the hearing."

A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exerciSe of discretion. 

### See NRS 34.160; 

### Int'l Game Tech., Inc, v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). A writ of prohibition is appropriate when "the proceedings of any tribunal, corporation, board or person exercising judicial functions are without or in excess of the jurisdiction of such tribunal, corporation, board or person." NRS 34.320. It is within this court's sole discretion to determine if a writ petition will be considered. 

### Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991). Petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted. 

### Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).

We are not persuaded that our extraordinary intervention is warranted. SCR 105(3) provides for our automatic review of hearing panel decisions recommending certain types of discipline, and makes an appeal available for all other types. Accordingly, if the hearing leads to discipline being imposed against her, petitioner has a plain, speedy, and adequate legal remedy in the form of such automatic review of or appeal from that

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) I 94Th 434).J.

discipline. 

### See NRS 34.170; NRS 34.330; 

### Pan, 120 Nev. at 224, 88 P.3d at 841. Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED. , C.J. Hardesty


### a

- 1

### 1

- 

### 51 6t—S 2 R c l

Parraguirre 

# D Ok

- 

## A

- 

## C

- 

## 1 kJ & J. Douglas

Gibbons

cc: Lynn R. Shoen State Bar of Nevada/Las Vegas

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 3 (0) 1947A ea
### §§3001 to 3007. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Sections 3001 to 3007 were omitted pursuant to section 3007 which provided that this chapter terminated Sept. 30, 1984.

Section 3001, Pub. L. 96–460, §2, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 2044, stated the Congressional findings and purposes for this chapter.

Section 3002, Pub. L. 96–460, §3, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 2045, defined terms for the purposes of this chapter.

Section 3003, Pub. L. 96–460, §4, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 2045, required the Secretary of Commerce to establish in the Department of Commerce an office for Chesapeake Bay Research Coordination.

Section 3004, Pub. L. 96–460, §5, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 2046, established the Chesapeake Bay Research Board.

Section 3005, Pub. L. 96–460, §6, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 2047, authorized appropriations to carry out the purposes of this chapter.

Section 3006, Pub. L. 96–460, §7, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 2047, established the relationship between this chapter and existing Federal, State, and local authority.

Section 3007, Pub. L. 96–460, §8, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 2048, provided that this chapter and the authority conferred by it would terminate Sept. 30, 1984.

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

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 96–460, §1, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat. 2044, provided that this chapter may be cited as the "Chesapeake Bay Research Coordination Act of 1980".
### §3601. Definitions

As used in this chapter, the term—

(1) "Act of 1976" means the Act entitled "An Act to provide for the conservation and management of the fisheries, and for other purposes", approved April 13, 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.);

(2) "Commission" means any of the Commissions of the Organization that are established by the Convention;

(3) "Commissioner" means a United States Commissioner appointed under section 3602 of this title;

(4) "Convention" means the Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean, signed at Reykjavik, Iceland, on March 2, 1982;

(5) "Council" means the Council established by the Convention;

(6) "fishing" has the same meaning as such term has in section 3(10) 1 of the Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1802(10));

(7) "Organization" means the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization established under the Convention;

(8) "person" has the same meaning as such term has in section 3(19) 1 of the Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1802(19)); and

(9) "salmon" means all species of salmon which migrate in or into the waters of the Atlantic Ocean north of 36 degrees north latitude.

(Pub. L. 97–389, title III, §302, Dec. 29, 1982, 96 Stat. 1951.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

An Act to provide for the conservation and management of the fisheries, and for other purposes, approved April 13, 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.), referred to in par. (1), is Pub. L. 94–265, Apr. 13, 1976, 90 Stat. 331, known as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which is classified principally to chapter 38 (§1801 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1801 of this title and Tables.

Section 3 of the Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1802), referred to in pars. (6) and (8), was subsequently amended, and section 3(10) and (19) no longer defines the terms "fishing" and "person". However, such terms are defined elsewhere in that section.

#### Codification

Section 3602 of this title, referred to in par. (3), was in the original "section 403 of this title", meaning section 403 of title III of Pub. L. 97–389, and has been translated as section 3602 of this title, section 303 of title III of Pub. L. 97–389, as the probable intent of Congress, because title III of Pub. L. 97–389 does not contain a section 403 and section 3602 of this title relates to appointment of a United States Commissioner.

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

#### Short Title

Pub. L. 97–389, §1, Dec. 29, 1982, 96 Stat. 1949, provided: "That this Act [enacting this chapter, amending sections 779b, 1034, and 1401 of this title and sections 688 and 883 of Title 46, Appendix, Shipping, and enacting provisions set out as notes under section 1823 of this title and section 688 of Title 46, Appendix] may be cited as the 'Fisheries Amendments of 1982'."

Pub. L. 97–389, title III, §301, Dec. 29, 1982, 96 Stat. 1951, provided that: "This title [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the 'Atlantic Salmon Convention Act of 1982'."

1 See References in Text note below.