alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 343.1 Application.

A person who lost citizenship of the United States incidental to service in one of the allied armies during World War I or II, or by voting in a political election in a country not at war with the United States during World War II, and who was naturalized under the provisions of section 323 of the Nationality Act of 1940, as amended, or a person who, before January 13, 1941, resumed United States citizenship under the twelfth subdivision of section 4 of the act of June 29, 1906, may obtain a certificate evidencing such citizenship by making application in accordance with USCIS instructions. The applicant shall be required to appear in person before an assigned officer for interrogation under oath or affirmation upon the application. When the application is approved, a certificate of naturalization or repatriation shall be issued and delivered in person, in the United States only, upon the applicant's signed receipt therefor. If the application is denied, the applicant shall be notified of the reasons therefor and his right to appeal in accordance with the provisions of part 103 of this chapter.

[23 FR 9125, Nov. 26, 1958, as amended at 32 FR 9635, July 4, 1967; 76 FR 53805, Aug. 29, 2011]
#### Moses G. Golden, Appellant, v. Lyerly Full Fashioned Mills, Inc., Respondent.

No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., TJntermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Housing and Urban Development

          - [Docket No. FR-5477-N-12]

# AGENCY:

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible use to assist the homeless.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Juanita Perry, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 7262, Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202) 708-1234; TTY number for the hearing- and speech-impaired (202) 708-2565 (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), or call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In accordance with the December 12, 1988 court order in                     *National Coalition for the Homeless*                     v.                     *Veterans Administration*, No. 88-2503-OG (D.DC), HUD publishes a Notice, on a weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for suitability for use to assist the homeless. Today's Notice is for the purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been determined suitable or unsuitable this week.                

Dated: March 17, 2011.

Mark R. Johnston,

Deputy Assistant. Secretary for Special Needs.

[FR Doc. 2011-6761 Filed 3-24-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
###### Editorial Note on Part 1240

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1240 appear at 68 FR 9846, Feb. 28, 2003, and at 68 FR 10355, Mar. 3, 2003.

#### § 1240.37 Appeals.

Except for temporary exclusions under section 235(c) of the Act, an appeal from a decision of an Immigration Judge under this part may be taken by either party pursuant to § 1003.38 of this chapter.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 7821** 

ROGER LEE HARRELL , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA , Respondent

– Appellee, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond
. Robert E. Payne , Senior District Judge. ( 3:13

- cv - 00153

- REP )

Submitted : March 27 , 2014 Decided: March 31, 2014

Before MOTZ , Circuit Judge , and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judges
.
Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Roger Lee Harrell, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Roger Lee Harrell seeks to appeal the district court ’s order d ismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition as successive . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the di strict court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner m ust demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Harrell has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presen ted in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
### Need to return call by / at/between and . Signature: ___________________________ Project No.: 0172.07.005.504 DISTRIBUTION

Page _1 _ of __1

_

Project Name: 304(m) Annual Review

TELEPHONE CALL RECORD

Outgoing Call Date: 4/22/2010 Time: 1:00 pm EST

Company Name: Clear Lakes Trout Company (IDG130011) Contact Name: Dirk Bogaard

Phone No.: (208) 543-6444

Name: Elizabeth Sabol Eastern Research Group

GENERAL SUBJECT : Copper concentration reported to DMR in 2008



## TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN

I called Clear Lakes Trout Company on April 22, 2010, to speak with Dirk Bogaard. I left Mr. Bogaard a

message identifying myself and why I was calling. Mr. Bogaar d returned my phone call on Friday, April 23, at

11:00 am. We briefly discussed the copper discharges from Outf all 001.

Mr. Bogaard explained that there should be no copper conc entration reported to DMR in 2008 because the

facility no longer uses copper in any of the processes a t the facility. He also stated that the permit only re quires

conditional reporting for copper. After checking the disc harge monitoring reports submitted in 2008, he

confirmed that the reported 9 mg/L of copper, in January 2008, was a data entry error. I told him that we would

correct the concentration error in our database.
#### Carmelo Di Nome v. Personal Finance Company of New York.

Settle order on notice. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21


                       SUBSIDIARIES OF THE CORPORATION
                       -------------------------------

                    SLC Operating Limited Partnership
                    Hotel Investors of Arizona, Inc.
                    Hotel Investors of Nebraska, Inc.
                    Hotel Investors of Michigan, Inc.
                    Hotel Investors of Missouri, Inc.
                    Hotel Investors Corporation of Nevada
                    Hotel Investors of Virginia, Inc.
                    Columbus Operators, Inc.
                    Lyntex Properties, Inc.
                    Western Host, Inc.



                          SUBSIDIARIES OF THE TRUST
                          -------------------------

                    SLT Realty Limited Partnership
                    Starlex Company LLC
                    SLT Realty Company LLC
#### § 335.5 Receipt of derogatory information after grant.

In the event that USCIS receives derogatory information concerning an applicant whose application has already been granted as provided in § 335.3(a) of this chapter, but who has not yet taken the oath of allegiance as provided in part 337 of this chapter, USCIS shall remove the applicant's name from any list of granted applications or of applicants scheduled for administration of the oath of allegiance, until such time as the matter can be resolved. USCIS shall notify the applicant in writing of the receipt of the specific derogatory information, with a motion to reopen the previously adjudicated application, giving the applicant 15 days to respond. If the applicant overcomes the derogatory information, the application will be granted and the applicant will be scheduled for administration of the oath of allegiance. Otherwise the motion to reopen will be granted and the application will be denied pursuant to § 336.1 of this chapter.

[56 FR 50498, Oct. 7, 1991, as amended at 58 FR 49914, Sept. 24, 1993; 76 FR 53801, Aug. 29, 2011]
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Before the

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 

Release No. 94754 / April 19, 2022

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING

File No. 3-20783

In the Matter of

Scott Bohaboy,

Respondent.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

EXTENSION ORDER

The Division of Enforcement (“Division”) has requested an extension of time until 

January 31, 2023 to submit a Proposed Plan of Distribution under Rule 1101(a) of the 

Commission’s Rules on Fair Fund and Disgorgement Plans, 17 C.F.R. § 201.1101(a). 

On February 22, 2022, the Commission issued an Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist 

Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 and 21C of the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing a Cease-and-Desist Order (the “Order”) 

against Scott Bohaboy (“Bohaboy”).

1

 Bohaboy was Treasure of Baxter International Inc. 

(“Baxter”) from July 2015 until October 2019. In the Order, the Commission found that

beginning in at least 2009 and continuing through July 2019, Baxter improperly leveraged its 

foreign exchange rate convention by engaging in intra-company transactions for the purpose of 

generating foreign exchange accounting gains or avoiding foreign exchange accounting losses 

(the “FX Transactions”). These FX Transactions had the effect of materially misstating Baxter’s 

 

1

 Securities Act Rel. No. 11034 (Feb. 22, 2022).
2

net income as reported in public filings. In October 2019, Baxter announced that it was 

conducting an internal investigation concerning the FX Transactions. In March 2020, Baxter 

restated its financial statements, which reduced its previously reported net income for 2017 

through June 30, 2019 and retained earnings as of January 1, 2017 by 582 million, collectively. 

The Commission found that Bohaboy was aware of the consistent gains, but never considered how 

the Treasury department was able to generate gains consistently, or whether the transactions that 

generated the gains were permissible. The Commission ordered Bohaboy to pay a civil money 

penalty of $125,000 and created a Fair Fund pursuant to Section 308(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley 

Act of 2002. Bohaboy has paid in full. 

In its request for an extension of time, the Division states that additional time is needed to 

among other things, solicit and appoint a fund administrator; develop the distribution 

methodology; and prepare the proposed plan of distribution.

Accordingly, for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Division’s 

request for an extension of time until January 31, 2023 to submit a Proposed Plan of Distribution 

is granted. 

For the Commission, by the Division of Enforcement, pursuant to delegated authority.2

Vanessa A. Countryman

Secretary 

 

2

 17 C.F.R. § 200.30-4(a)(21)(i).
III 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 443 

Recognizing and celebrating on November 30, 2019, the vital role of small 

businesses and the efforts of the Small Business Administration to help 

people in the United States start, build, and grow businesses. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 21, 2019 

Mr. RUBIO (for himself, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. PORTMAN, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. 

RISCH, Mrs. SHAHEEN, Mr. TILLIS, Mr. BOOKER, Mr. BRAUN, Ms. 

HIRONO, Mr. ALEXANDER, Ms. DUCKWORTH, Mr. ISAKSON, Ms. ROSEN, 

Mr. ENZI, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. WYDEN, Mr. HOEVEN, 

Mr. CARPER, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. YOUNG, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. THUNE, Mr. TESTER, Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina, Mr. 

WHITEHOUSE, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. UDALL, Mr. ROUNDS, Mr. KING, 

Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. PETERS, Ms. ERNST, Ms. HARRIS, Mr. KENNEDY, 

Ms. HASSAN, Mr. PERDUE, Mr. DAINES, and Mr. BLUMENTHAL) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 

Small Business and Entrepreneurship 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing and celebrating on November 30, 2019, the vital 

role of small businesses and the efforts of the Small 

Business Administration to help people in the United 

States start, build, and grow businesses. 

Whereas, as of September 2019, there are more than 

30,700,000 small businesses in the United States; 

Whereas small businesses in the United States— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•SRES 443 IS 

(1) represent 99.9 percent of all businesses in the 

United States; 

(2) employ nearly 48 percent of private sector employees in the United States; 

(3) constitute almost 2 of every 3 new jobs; and 

(4) constitute 97.5 percent of firms that export 

goods; and 

Whereas November 30, 2019, is an appropriate day to recognize small businesses and encourage consumers to support local small businesses during the holiday shopping 

season: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate joins the Small Business 

2 Administration in— 

3 (1) celebrating the entrepreneurial spirit of 

4 small business owners in the United States; 

5 (2) recognizing the importance of creating poli6 cies that promote a business-friendly environment 

7 for small business owners that is free of unnecessary 

8 and burdensome regulations and red tape; 

9 (3) supporting and encouraging young entre10 preneurs to pursue passions and create more startup 

11 businesses; 

12 (4) showing appreciation for the many ways in 

13 which small businesses support— 

14 (A) the communities of which small busi15 nesses are a part; and 

16 (B) the workers who are employed by 

17 small businesses; and 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•SRES 443 IS 

1 (5) celebrating the invaluable contribution that 

2 small businesses make to the United States as the 

3 backbone of the economy. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
----

Judgement of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 June 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht München (Germany)) — Sachsenmilch AG v Oberfinanzdirektion Nürnberg

(Case C-196/05) (1)

(Common Customs Tariff - Tariff classification - Combined Nomenclature - Subheading 0406 10 (fresh cheese) - Annex I to Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1832/2002 - Tariff classification of pizza mozzarella in block form that has been stored after its manufacture for one to two weeks at a low temperature)

(2006/C 178/14)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht München

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Sachsenmilch AG

Defendant: Oberfinanzdirektion Nürnberg

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Munchen — Interpretation of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1789/2003 of 11 September 2003 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1987 L 256, p.1) — Subheading 0406 10 CN (fresh cheese) — Mozzarella for pizza that has been stored after production for one to two weeks at low temperature

Operative part of the judgement

The Court:

Subheading 0406 10 of the Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1832/2002 of 1 August 2002, must be interpreted as meaning that it applies to pizza mozzarella in block form that was stored after its manufacture for one to two weeks at 2 to 4 °C unless that storage is sufficient for such mozzarella to undergo a process at the end of which it has acquired one or more new objective characteristics or properties, in particular with regard to its composition, appearance or taste. It is for the national court to determine whether those conditions are satisfied.

----

(1)OJ C 182, 23.7.2005.

----
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA 

RICHMOND DIVISION 

IN RE: MICHAEL ROBERT DICKINSON CASE NO. 18-34024-KRH 

DEBTOR CHAPTER 13 

ORDER AVOIDING JUDICIAL LIEN 

HELD BY SAMUEL J.T. MOORE, III 

The First Motion to Avoid Judicial Lien that Impairs the Debtor’s Exemption filed by the 

debtor, Michael Robert Dickinson, is hereby GRANTED based on Samuel J.T. Moore, III’s 

admission of his failure to properly record his judgment received from the Virginia Beach Circuit 

Court (attached hereto as part of this order as Instrument # 17-0218269) against the Debtor’s 

residential real estate at 3717 Patterson Avenue, Richmond, Virginia 23221. 

It is hereby ORDERED AND DECREED that the judicial lien held by Samuel J.T. 

Moore, III, granted by the Virginia Beach Circuit Court on September 5, 2017 is deemed invalid 

as a judgment lien against the debtor’s residential real estate at 3717 Patterson Avenue, 

Richmond, Virginia 23221. 

Date U.S. Bankruptcy Judge 

Entered: 

Sharon C. Stuart, Esquire 

Stuart Law Firm, LLC 

8002 Discovery Drive, Suite 422 

Henrico, VA 23229 

(804) 221-2162 office 

(804) 381-5026 facsimile 

Virginia State Bar No. 45026

Counsel for the Debtor 

Feb 27 2023 /s/ Kevin R Huennekens

Feb 27 2023

Case 18-34024-KRH Doc 106 Filed 02/27/23 Entered 02/27/23 13:29:52 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 6
I ask for this: 

/s/ Sharon C. Stuart 

Sharon C. Stuart, Esquire 

Stuart Law Firm, LLC 

8002 Discovery Drive, Suite 422 

Henrico, VA 23229 

(804) 221-2162 office 

(804) 381-5026 facsimile 

Virginia State Bar No. 45026 

PROOF OF SERVICE

The proposed order has been served upon all necessary parties on February 3, 2023 by either 

regular first class mail or CM/ECF Notification at the addresses below: 

Via regular first class mail to:

Samuel J.T. Moore III 

1011 West Grace Street 

Richmond, VA 23220 

Via CM/ECF Notification to: 

Carl M. Bates, Esquire 

Chapter 13 Trustee 

P.O. Box 1819 

Richmond, VA 23218

 /s/ Sharon C. Stuart 

 Counsel for Debtor 

 

Case 18-34024-KRH Doc 106 Filed 02/27/23 Entered 02/27/23 13:29:52 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 6
PARTIES TO RECEIVE COPIES 

STUART LAW FIRM, LLC 

8002 DISCOVERY DRIVE, SUITE 422 

HENRICO, VA 23229 

CARL M. BATES, ESQUIRE 

CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE 

PO BOX 1819 

RICHMOND, VA 23218 

OFFICE OF THE US TRUSTEE 

701 E. BROAD STREET 

ROOM 4304 

RICHMOND, VA 23219 

SAMUEL J.T. MOORE, III 

1011 WEST GRACE STREET 

RICHMOND, VA 23220 

MICHAEL DICKINSON 

3717 PATTERSON AVENUE 

RICHMOND, VA 23221 

Case 18-34024-KRH Doc 106 Filed 02/27/23 Entered 02/27/23 13:29:52 Desc Main

Document Page 3 of 6
Case 18-34024-KRH Doc 106 Filed 02/27/23 Entered 02/27/23 13:29:52 Desc Main

Document Page 4 of 6
Case 18-34024-KRH Doc 106 Filed 02/27/23 Entered 02/27/23 13:29:52 Desc Main

Document Page 5 of 6
Case 18-34024-KRH Doc 106 Filed 02/27/23 Entered 02/27/23 13:29:52 Desc Main

Document Page 6 of 6
#### § 660.101 Purpose.

The purpose of this subpart is to implement the Forest Highway (FH) Program which enhances local, regional, and national benefits of FHs funded under the public lands highway category of the coordinated Federal Lands Highway Program. As provided in 23 U.S.C. 202, 203, and 204, the program, developed in cooperation with State and local agencies, provides safe and adequate transportation access to and through National Forest System (NFS) lands for visitors, recreationists, resource users, and others which is not met by other transportation programs. Forest highways assist rural and community economic development and promote tourism and travel.
§ 205.2 Revocation on notice. ( a ) *General.* Any Service officer authorized to approve a petition under section 204 of the Act may revoke the approval of that petition upon notice to the petitioner on any ground other than those specified in § 205.1 when the necessity for the revocation comes to the attention of this Service.
( b ) *Notice of intent.* Revocation of the approval of a petition of self-petition under paragraph (a) of this section will be made only on notice to the petitioner or self-petitioner. The petitioner or self-petitioner must be given the opportunity to offer evidence in support of the petition or self-petition and in opposition to the grounds alleged for revocation of the approval.
( c ) *Notification of revocation.* If, upon reconsideration, the approval previously granted is revoked, the director shall provide the petitioner or the self-petitioner with a written notification of the decision that explains the specific reasons for the revocation. The director shall notify the consular officer having jurisdiction over the visa application, if applicable, of the revocation of an approval.
( d ) *Appeals.* The petitioner or self-petitioner may appeal the decision to revoke the approval within 15 days after the service of notice of the revocation. The appeal must be filed as provided in part 3 of this chapter, unless the Associate Commissioner for Examinations exercises appellate jurisdiction over the revocation under part 103 of this chapter. Appeals filed with the Associate Commissioner for Examinations must meet the requirements of part 103 of this chapter.
[48 FR 19156, Apr. 28, 1983, as amended at 58 FR 42851, Aug. 12, 1993; 61 FR 13078, Mar. 26, 1996]
### §460o–6. Civil and criminal jurisdiction and taxing power of State

Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to deprive any State or political subdivision thereof, of its right to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction over the lands and waters within the area or of its right to tax persons, corporations, franchises, or property on the lands and waters included in the area.

(Pub. L. 89–158, §7, Sept. 1, 1965, 79 Stat. 614.)