alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 16.103 Exemption of the INTERPOL-United States National Central Bureau (INTERPOL-USNCB) System. ( a ) The following system of records is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c) (3) and (4), (d), (e) (1), (2), and (3), (e)(4) (G) and (H), (e)(5) and (8), (f) and (g): ( 1 ) The INTERPOL-United States National Central Bureau (INTERPOL-USNCB) (Department of Justice) INTERPOL-USNCB Records System (JUSTICE/INTERPOL-001). This exemption applies only to the extent that information in this system is subject to exemption pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a (j)(2), (k)(2), and (k)(5).
( b ) Exemptions from the particular subsections are justified for the following reasons: ( 1 ) From subsection (c)(3) because the release of accounting disclosures would place the subject of an investigation on notice that he is under investigation and provide him with significant information concerning the nature of the investigation, thus resulting in a serious impediment to law enforcement.
( 2 ) From subsections (c)(4), (d), (e)(4) (G), and (H), (f) and (g) because these provisions concern individual access to records and such access might compromise ongoing investigations reveal investigatory techniques and confidential informants, and invade the privacy of private citizens who provide information in connection with a particular investigation.
( 3 ) From subsection (e)(1) because information received in the course of an international criminal investigation may involve a violation of state or local law, and it is beneficial to maintain this information to provide investigative leads to state and local law enforcement agencies.
( 4 ) From subsection (e)(2) because collecting information from the subject of criminal investigations would thwart the investigation by placing the subject on notice.
( 5 ) From subsection (e)(3) because supplying an individual with a statement of the intended use of the requested information could compromise the existence of a confidential investigation, and may inhibit cooperation.
( 6 ) From subsection (e)(5) because the vast majority of these records come from local criminal justice agencies and it is administratively impossible to ensure that the records comply with this provision. Submitting agencies are, however, urged on a continuing basis to ensure that their records are accurate and include all dispositions.
( 7 ) From subsection (e)(8) because the notice requirements of this provision could present a serious impediment to law enforcement by revealing investigative techniques, procedures, and the existence of confidential investigations.
[Order No. 8-82, 47 FR 44255, Oct. 7, 1982, as amended by Order No. 6-86, 51 FR 15479, Apr. 24, 1986]
6 ft

Nyob kom sib nrug deb yam tsawg li 6 fij (feet) (thaj 

tsam li 2 dag tes deb) los ntawm lwm cov neeg.

Nyob twj ywm hauv tsev thaum koj muaj mob, tshwj tsis 

yog tias yuav tsum tau txais kev saib xyuas kho mob.

Tu ntxuav kom huv si thiab tsuag 

tshuaj tua kab mob rau cov 

khoom thiab cov chaw (npoo) 

uas nquag kov (chwv) tas li.

Siv ntawv so ntswg los ua zoo npog koj qhov ncauj 

thaum hnoos los sis txham, tag ntawd muab daim 

ntaub so ntswg ntawd pov tseg rau hauv lub thawv 

rau khib nyiab thiab ntxuav koj ob txhais tes.

Siv xab npum thiab dej ntxuav koj ob txhais tes tas 

li kom ntev tsawg kawg yog 20 chib (xis nkoos).

Txuag Kev Sib Kis los ntawm Cov Kab Mob

cdc.gov/coronavirus

316917-AG June 15, 2020 3:20 PM

Pab tiv thaiv kev sib kis los ntawm cov kab mob uas cuam tshuam 

txog hlab ua pa xws li Tus Kab Mob Khaus Viv-19 (COVID-19).

Tsis txhob tuav (chwv) koj 

ob lub qhov muag, qhov 

ntswg, thiab qhov ncauj.

Thaum nyob rau hauv tej chaw 

muaj zej tsoom nyob coob, yuav 

tsum rau ib daim ntaub npog 

ntsej muag uas npog tau koj lub 

qhov ncauj thiab qhov ntswg.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009-7056 RICHARD A. DANIELS,

Claimant-Appellant,

v. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs,

Respondent-Appellee. Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in

07-1317, Judge William A. Moorman.

ON MOTION Before LINN, Circuit Judge. ORDER The court treats Richard A. Daniels' untimely brief as a motion for an extension of time to file his brief. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The motion is granted. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should calculate the due date for his brief from the date of filing of this order. FOR THE COURT 

### MAY -1 

## 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date

cc: Richard A. Daniels Kent Kiffner, Esq. Jan Horbaly Clerk U.S. eau

THE 

# Filthier* s17 MAY = 1 2009
riORIIALY CLERIf
§ 115.387 Data collection. ( a ) The agency shall collect accurate, uniform data for every allegation of sexual abuse at facilities under its direct control using a standardized instrument and set of definitions.
( b ) The agency shall aggregate the incident-based sexual abuse data at least annually.
( c ) The incident-based data collected shall include, at a minimum, the data necessary to answer all questions from the most recent version of the Survey of Sexual Violence conducted by the Department of Justice.
( d ) The agency shall maintain, review, and collect data as needed from all available incident-based documents, including reports, investigation files, and sexual abuse incident reviews.
( e ) The agency also shall obtain incident-based and aggregated data from every private facility with which it contracts for the confinement of its residents.
( f ) Upon request, the agency shall provide all such data from the previous calendar year to the Department of Justice no later than June 30.
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-12-00400-CR

GUADALUPE CORTEZ

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

On Appeal from the

148th District Court of Nueces County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 06-CR-2880-E

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

March 27, 2014
§ 5.402 Labeling informational materials. ( a ) Within the meaning of this part, informational materials shall be deemed labeled whenever they have been marked or stamped conspicuously at their beginning with a statement setting forth such information as is required under section 4(b) of the Act.
( b ) Informational materials which are required to be labeled under section 4(b) of the Act and which are in the form of prints shall be marked or stamped conspicuously at the beginning of such materials with a statement in the language or languages used therein, setting forth such information as is required under section 4(b) of the Act.
( c ) Informational materials required to be labeled under section 4(b) of the Act but which are not in the form of prints shall be accompanied by a statement setting forth such information as is required under section 4(b) of the Act.
( d ) Informational materials that are televised or broadcast, or which are caused to be televised or broadcast, by an agent of a foreign principal, shall be introduced by a statement which is reasonably adapted to convey to the viewers or listeners thereof such information as is required under section 4(b) of the Act.
( e ) An agent of a foreign principal who transmits or causes to be transmitted in the U.S. mails or by any means or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce a still or motion picture film which contains informational materials shall insert at the beginning of such film a statement which is reasonably adapted to convey to the viewers thereof such information as is required under section 4(b) of the Act.
( f ) For the purpose of section 4(e) of the Act, the statement that must preface or accompany informational materials or a request for information shall be in writing.
[Order No. 376-67, 32 FR 6362, Apr. 22, 1967, as amended by Order No. 2674-2003, 68 FR 33631, June 5, 2003]
### §403h–2. Repealed. June 25, 1948, ch. 646, §39, 62 Stat. 992, eff. Sept. 1, 1948

Section, act Apr. 29, 1942, ch. 264, §2, 56 Stat. 259, related to inclusion of park in a judicial district. See sections 113 and 123 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
### SUBCHAPTER IV—INTERNATIONAL DOLPHIN CONSERVATION PROGRAM
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  SBA Leadership 
-  Marlene Cintron 

#   Marlene Cintron

Regional Administrator

            Download high-resolution image          

As Region II Administrator, Marlene Cintron oversees SBA programs, offices and operations in the SBA’s Atlantic region, serving New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Ms. Cintron was born and raised in The Bronx. During her trajectory, she has worked for Congressman Robert Garcia, Mayor David N. Dinkins, Governor Pedro Rosello of Puerto Rico, and New York State Senator Ruben Diaz, Sr. In 2010, she was named President of the Bronx Overall Economic Development Corporation and The Business Initiative Corporation of New York where she utilized her government relations and financial acumen to support Bronx businesses which markedly reduced its unemployment rate and attracted over 9 billion dollars in private equity to the borough. 

Ms. Cintron received her bachelor’s degree from SUNY College at Old Westbury, her Master’s in Education Administration from Fordham University and her Juris Doctorate from the Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, DC.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00053-CV

Ebony HARDMAN,

Appellants

v.

DIAMOND RIDGE APARTMENTS,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 10, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 390,226

Honorable Jason Pulliam, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE STONE, JUSTICE ANGELINI, AND JUSTICE MARION

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, appellant’s motion to dismiss this 

appeal is GRANTED, and this appeal is DISMISSED. It is ORDERED that no costs shall be 

assessed against appellant, Ebony Hardman, in relation to this appeal because she qualifies as 

indigent under TEX. R. APP. P. 20. 

SIGNED March 12, 2014.

_________________________________

Catherine Stone, Chief Justice
§ 545.20 Purpose and scope. ( a ) The Bureau of Prisons operates an inmate work program within its institutions. To the extent practicable, the work program: ( 1 ) Reduces inmate idleness, while allowing the inmate to improve and/or develop useful job skills, work habits, and experiences that will assist in post-release employment; and
( 2 ) Ensures that activities necessary to maintain the day-to-day operation of the institution are completed. Sentenced inmates who are physically and mentally able to work are required to participate in the work program. When approved by the Warden or designee, drug treatment programming, education, or vocational training may be substituted for all or part of the work program.
( b ) The Warden may recognize an inmate's work performance or productive participation in specified correctional programs by granting performance pay.
[49 FR 38915, Oct. 1, 1984, as amended at 61 FR 379, Jan. 4, 1996]
§ 401.82 Authorization to conduct hearings. ( a ) *Written requests for hearings.* Upon receipt of a written request for a hearing pursuant to this subpart, the Executive Director shall review the record available with regard to the action or decision for which a hearing is requested. Thereafter, the Executive Director shall present the request for a hearing to the Commission for its consideration. The Commission shall grant a request for a hearing pursuant to this subpart if it determines that an adequate record with regard to the action or decision is not available, the contested case involves a determination by the Executive Director or staff which requires further action by the Commission or that the Commission has found that an administrative hearing is necessary or desirable. If the Commission denies any request for a hearing in a contested case, the party seeking such a hearing shall be limited to such remedies as may be provided by the Compact or other applicable law or court rule.
( b ) *Commission directed hearings.* This subpart shall be applicable to any proceeding which Commission regulation or the Commission directs be conducted in accordance with the provisions, of this subpart.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

August 28, 2024

No. 04

- 22

- 00483

- CR

Ricardo GONZALES , Jr., Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017

- CR

- 13554

Honorable Jefferson Moore , Judge Presiding

ABATEMENT ORDER

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, we ABATE this appeal and REMAND the cause to the trial court to conduct a hearing on Ricardo Gonzales Jr.’s motion for new trial on or before October 31, 2024. The trial judge shall see that a record i s made and shall order the court reporter and the trial clerk to forward a transcribed record of the hearing and a supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s signed order ruling on the motion for new trial. Those records

shall be filed with t he clerk of this court on or before thirty days following the trial court’s order. See Guillory v. State , 652 S.W.3d 499, 507 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 2022, abatement order on reh’g) (per curiam); see also Martinez v. State , 74 S.W.3d 19, 21

- 22 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002).

The appeal is abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this court’s active docket. The appeal will be reinstated on this court’s active docket after the supplemental reporter’s and clerk’s records are filed. It is the responsibility of any party seeking reinstatement to request a hearing date from the trial court and to schedule a hearing in compliance with this court’s order. If the parties do not request a hearing, the court coordinator of the trial court shall set a hearing date and notify the parties of the date and time of the hearing. See Guillory , 652 S.W.3d at 507

– 08.

It is so ORDERED on August 28, 2024.

_____________________________ Irene Rios , Justice04

- 22

- 00483

- CR

- 2

- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 28th day of August, 2024

.

_____________________________ Luz Estrada , Chief Deputy Clerk
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 99


    Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant To
                  Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

  I, M. J. Shaheed, President and Chief Executive Officer of AuGRID Corporation
  (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
  of 2002, 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, that:

- the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the fiscal quarter ended
  March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
  date hereof (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

- the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
  respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company for
  the periods presented therein.


                Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      As Adopted Pursuant To Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


  I, Stan Chapman, Treasurer of AuGRID Corporation (the "Company"), certify,
  pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
  1350, that:

- the Company's Report on Form 10-QSB for the year ended March 31, 2003, as
  filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
  "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
  the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

- the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
  respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company for
  the periods presented therein.
Appendix G2 

Empire Connector Project
§ 51.5 Termination of coverage. ( a ) *Expiration.* The requirements of section 5 will expire at the end of the twenty-five-year period following the effective date of the amendments made by the Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, Coretta Scott King, César E. Chávez, Barbara C. Jordan, William C. Velásquez, and Dr. Hector P. Garcia Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006 (VRARA), which amendments became effective on July 27, 2006. *See* section 4(a)(8) of the VRARA.
( b ) *Bailout.* Any political subunit in a covered jurisdiction or a political subdivision of a covered State, a covered jurisdiction or a political subdivision of a covered State, or a covered State may terminate the application of section 5 (“bailout”) by obtaining the declaratory judgment described in section 4(a) of the Act.
[Order No. 3262-2011, 76 FR 21243, Apr. 15, 2011]
§ 540.50 Visits to inmates not in regular population status. ( a ) *Admission and holdover status.* The Warden may limit to the immediate family of the inmate visits during the admission-orientation period or for holdovers where there is neither a visiting list from a transferring institution nor other verification of proposed visitors.
( b ) *Hospital patients.* ( 1 ) When visitors request to see an inmate who is hospitalized in the institution, the Chief Medical Officer (or, in his absence, the Health Services Administrator), in consultation with the Captain, shall determine whether a visit may occur, and if so, whether it may be held in the hospital.
( 2 ) Visits to inmates hospitalized in the community may be restricted to only the immediate family and are subject to the general visiting policy of that hospital.
( c ) *Detention or segregation status.* Ordinarily, an inmate retains visiting privileges while in detention or segregation status. Visiting may be restricted or disallowed, however, when an inmate, while in detention or segregation status, is charged with, or has been found to have committed, a prohibited act having to do with visiting guidelines or has otherwise acted in a way that would reasonably indicate that he or she would be a threat to the orderliness or security of the visiting room. Loss of an inmate's visiting privileges for other reasons may not occur unless the inmate is provided a hearing before the Discipline Hearing Officer (DHO) in accordance with the provisions of § 541.17 of this chapter, following those provisions which are appropriate to the circumstances, which results in a finding by the DHO that the inmate committed a prohibited act and that there is a lack of other appropriate sanctions or that imposition of an appropriate sanction previously has been ineffective. The Unit Discipline Committee (UDC) may not impose a loss of visiting privileges for inmates in detention or segregation status. The provisions of this paragraph (c) do not interrupt or delay a loss of visiting sanction imposed by the UDC or DHO prior to the inmate's placement in detention or segregation status.
[45 FR 44232, June 30, 1980, as amended at 51 FR 26128, July 18, 1986; 58 FR 39095, July 21, 1993]
Exhibit
31.1








**Certification
Pursuant To Section 302 Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002**





I, **George
Sharp** , Chief
Executive Officer of Sharp Holding Corporation, certify that:





1.  I have
reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of **Sharp
Holding Corporation** ;





2.  Based on
my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;





3.  Based on
my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of Sharp Holding Corporation as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;





4.  Sharp
Holding Corporation's other certifying officer and I:





(a) Are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for Sharp Holding
Corporation and have:





(b)
Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to Sharp Holding Corporation, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;





(c)
Evaluated the effectiveness of Sharp Holding Corporation's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





(d)
Disclosed in this report any change in Sharp Holding Corporation's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during Sharp Holding
Corporation's most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, Sharp Holding Corporation's internal
control over financial reporting; and





5.  Sharp
Holding Corporation's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
Sharp Holding Corporation's auditors and the audit committee of Sharp Holding
Corporation's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):





(a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect Sharp Holding Corporation's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and





(b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in Sharp Holding Corporation's internal control over
financial reporting.





Date: **May
20, 2005**


**/s/**
**George Sharp**


**George
Sharp**


**Chief
Executive Officer of Sharp Holding Corporation**
###### Editorial Note on Part 0

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 0.89 Authority to seize arms and munitions of war.

The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is authorized to exercise the authority conferred upon the Attorney General by section 1 of E.O. 10863 of February 18, 1960 (25 FR 1507), relating to the seizure of arms and munitions of war, and other articles, pursuant to section 1 of title VI of the act of June 15, 1917, 40 Stat. 223, as amended by section 1 of the Act of August 13, 1953, 67 Stat. 577 (22 U.S.C. 401).