alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 99.37 What conditions apply to disclosing directory information? ( a ) An educational agency or institution may disclose directory information if it has given public notice to parents of students in attendance and eligible students in attendance at the agency or institution of: ( 1 ) The types of personally identifiable information that the agency or institution has designated as directory information;
( 2 ) A parent's or eligible student's right to refuse to let the agency or institution designate any or all of those types of information about the student as directory information; and
( 3 ) The period of time within which a parent or eligible student has to notify the agency or institution in writing that he or she does not want any or all of those types of information about the student designated as directory information.
( b ) An educational agency or institution may disclose directory information about former students without complying with the notice and opt out conditions in paragraph (a) of this section. However, the agency or institution must continue to honor any valid request to opt out of the disclosure of directory information made while a student was in attendance unless the student rescinds the opt out request.
( c ) A parent or eligible student may not use the right under paragraph (a)(2) of this section to opt out of directory information disclosures to— ( 1 ) Prevent an educational agency or institution from disclosing or requiring a student to disclose the student's name, identifier, or institutional email address in a class in which the student is enrolled; or
( 2 ) Prevent an educational agency or institution from requiring a student to wear, to display publicly, or to disclose a student ID card or badge that exhibits information that may be designated as directory information under § 99.3 and that has been properly designated by the educational agency or institution as directory information in the public notice provided under paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
( d ) In its public notice to parents and eligible students in attendance at the agency or institution that is described in paragraph (a) of this section, an educational agency or institution may specify that disclosure of directory information will be limited to specific parties, for specific purposes, or both. When an educational agency or institution specifies that disclosure of directory information will be limited to specific parties, for specific purposes, or both, the educational agency or institution must limit its directory information disclosures to those specified in its public notice that is described in paragraph (a) of this section.
( e ) An educational agency or institution may not disclose or confirm directory information without meeting the written consent requirements in § 99.30 if a student's social security number or other non-directory information is used alone or combined with other data elements to identify or help identify the student or the student's records.
(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1232g(a)(5) (A) and (B))
[53 FR 11943, Apr. 11, 1988, as amended at 73 FR 74854, Dec. 9, 2008; 76 FR 75642, Dec. 2, 2011]
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Phoenixville Hospital, LLC, :

Appellant : CASES CONSOLIDATED

:

v. : No. 1281 C.D. 2021

:

County of Chester Board of :

Assessment Appeals, :

Phoenixville Area School District :

and Borough of Phoenixville :

Phoenixville Hospital, LLC, :

Appellant :

:

 v. : No. 1285 C.D. 2021

:

County of Chester Board of :

Assessment Appeals and :

Phoenixville Area School District :

PER CURIAM O R D E R

NOW, April 14, 2023, having considered Appellant’s application for 

reargument and Appellees’ answers in response thereto, the application is DENIED.
(No. 77- CC-1766

#### Thomas J. Murphy, Claimant, *v.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Order filed April 18, 1979.*

Polos, C.J.

This cause is before the Court following oral argument on Claimant’s petition for a rehearing.

The case involves construction of Ill.Rev.Stat. Ch. 127, 132.11-1, which provides, in pertinent part:

> “It is unlawful for any person... employed in any of the offices of state government... to have or acquire any contract, or any direct pecuniary interest in any contract therein, whether for stationery, printing, paper or for any services, materials or supplies, which will be wholly or partially satisfied by the payment of funds appropriated by the general assembly of the State of Illinois ...”

Claimant is a former employee of the Illinois Liquor Control Commission. He had been employed by the commission from February 13,1973, to and including June 30,1977. On June 7,1977, while Claimant was the executive director of the commission, he entered into a contract with the commission under which he was to render services subsequent to termination of his employment. Claimant seeks to recover the sum of $3,525.00 for services rendered under that contract.

Respondent opposes the claim, relying on the foregoing statute, and arguing that the contract between Claimant and the commission is void and of no effect.

On September 18,1978, this Court entered an order *715denying the claim herein, on the ground that the plain wording of the statute voided the contract between Claimant and the commission.

We thereafter granted a rehearing. Oral argument was had, and additional briefs had been filed by the parties.

The Court has carefully considered those briefs, and the arguments adduced at the hearing herein. The Court remains convinced, however, that the language of the statute in question is certain and unambiguous. The Court may therefore not construe that language, but rather must apply it as enacted by the legislature. S*ee Board of Education v. Chicago Teachers Union, 26 Ill. App. 3d 806, 326 N.E.2d 158, 161-2.*

It is agreed that Claimant entered into the contract in question while he was still an employee of the State of Ilinois. Under the terms of the foregoing statute, that contract is void and of no effect, and our order of September 18, 1978, denying this claim, will not be disturbed.
```

                                                                  EXHIBIT 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the filing by YouthStream Media Networks, Inc. (the
"Company") of its Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2005 (the "Quarterly Report") with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, I, Robert N. Weingarten, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

         (1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
         in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
         operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 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.

Date:  July 15, 2005                        /s/ ROBERT N. WEINGARTEN
                                           ------------------------------------
                                           Robert N. Weingarten
                                           Chief Financial Officer
```
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5344 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5344

To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to provide support to State 
  and local governments in their efforts to counter violent extremist 
                    threats, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 6, 2019

 Mr. Aguilar introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Homeland Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to provide support to State 
  and local governments in their efforts to counter violent extremist 
                    threats, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Preventing Radical Extremist's 
Violent Endeavors Now and Tomorrow Act of 2019'' or the ``PREVENT Act 
of 2019''.

SEC. 2. SUPPORT TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN THEIR EFFORTS TO 
              COUNTER VIOLENT EXTREMIST THREATS.

    Subsection (b) of section 801 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 
(6 U.S.C. 361) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and'' after the 
        semicolon at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(5) for the purposes of countering violent extremist 
        threats--
                    ``(A) provide training from specially trained 
                clinical social workers, psychologists, religious 
                leaders, community leaders, and law enforcement 
                personnel, to assist local efforts at securing the 
                homeland; and
                    ``(B) in coordination with the Federal Bureau of 
                Investigation, provide to State and local governments 
                specialists, analysts, and agents trained to counter 
                terrorism and White nationalism to assist, in the 
                manner and degree necessary, local efforts at 
                responding to such threats.''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 64 (Monday, April 4, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 18623]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7840]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration


Notification of Petition for Approval; Railroad Safety Program 
Plan

    Although not required, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is 
providing notice that it has received a petition for approval of a 
Railroad Safety Program Plan (RSPP) submitted pursuant to Title 49 Code 
of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 236, Subpart H. The petition is 
listed below, including the party seeking approval, and the requisite 
docket number. FRA is not accepting comments on this RSPP.

Long Island Rail Road

[Docket Number FRA-2011-0026]

    The Long Island Railroad (LIRR) submitted a petition for approval 
of an RSPP. The petition, RSPP and any related documents have been 
placed in the requisite docket (FRA-2011-0026) and are available for 
public inspection.
    Interested parties are invited to review the RSPP and associated 
documents at the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Docket Management 
Facility during regular business hours (9 a.m.-5 p.m.) at 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. All documents 
in the public docket are also available for inspection and copying on 
the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written 
communications received into any of our dockets by the name of the 
individual submitting the document (or signing the document, if 
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). 
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal 
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Page 19477) 
or at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC on March 28, 2010.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative 
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011-7840 Filed 4-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P
###### Editorial Note on Part 25

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 25 appear by T.D. ATF-437, 66 FR 5478, 5479, Jan. 19, 2001.

#### § 25.201 Removal by pipeline.

A brewer may remove beer from the brewery, without payment of tax, by pipeline to the bonded premises of a distilled spirits plant which is authorized to produce distilled spirits and which is located contiguous to the brewery.

(Sec. 201, Pub. L. 85-859, 72 Stat. 1365, as amended, 1389, as amended (26 U.S.C. 5222, 5412))
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 1,002

 1,000

 993

 982

 949

 912

 856

 871

 862

 860

 837

 827

 799

 823

 828

 861

 876

 944

 971

 932

 871

 890

 867

 866

 871

 926

 1,008

 1,017

 1,098

 1,122

 1,190

 897

 874

 859

 835

 792

 742

 683

 682

 721

 654

 665

 646

 650

 669

 669

 648

 602

 600

 600

 666

 660

 630

 638

 602

 619

 678

 643

 686

 717

 709

 731

 948

 936

 930

 911

 873

 836

 793

 789

 789

 763

 746

 740

 729

 739

 736

 741

 741

 762

 792

 770

 739

 714

 750

 760

 772

 786

 815

 824

 853

 887

 915

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

OCTOBER 2008 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: November 4, 2008

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

FARRAR PARK AT DUTCH SLOUGH
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 4 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 5 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 6 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 7 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 8 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 9 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 10 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 11 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 12 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 13 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 14 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 15 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 16 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 17 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 18 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 19 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 20 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 21 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 22 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 23 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 24 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 25 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 26 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 27 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 28 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 29 of 30
Case 18-34761-KLP Doc 18 Filed 10/04/18 Entered 10/04/18 10:10:09 Desc Main

 Document Page 30 of 30
### Part B—Libraries and Learning Resources
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 2,103

 2,248

 2,695

 2,817

 2,547

 2,068

 1,780

 1,727

 2,045

 1,668

 1,622

 1,734

 1,772

 2,066

 2,635

 3,156

 4,072

 4,944

 4,640

 3,616

 2,857

 2,705

 2,589

 2,722

 2,932

 3,417

 3,991

 3,340

 4,104

 4,878

 5,105

 781

 802

 795

 874

 818

 727

 683

 688

 708

 657

 646

 664

 692

 710

 723

 752

 774

 836

 924

 928

 803

 865

 872

 923

 970

 1,000

 1,119

 1,079

 1,081

 1,118

 1,178

 1,114

 1,171

 1,264

 1,382

 1,315

 1,179

 1,062

 1,058

 1,089

 1,023

 995

 996

 1,006

 1,062

 1,183

 1,312

 1,513

 1,870

 1,944

 1,692

 1,399

 1,331

 1,418

 1,551

 1,537

 1,726

 1,941

 1,702

 1,930

 2,166

 2,473

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

OCTOBER 2008 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: November 4, 2008

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

14 DAY

ACCUM

MEAN

14 DAY 

AVG

MEAN

 15,907

 15,870

 15,922

 16,077

 16,153

 16,192

 16,159

 16,143

 16,131

 16,070

 15,991

 15,903

 15,776

 15,716

 15,785

 15,926

 16,175

 16,663

 17,292

 17,805

 18,142

 18,415

 18,744

 19,272

 19,814

 20,544

 21,479

 22,119

 22,866

 23,720

 24,680

 1,136

 1,134

 1,137

 1,148

 1,154

 1,157

 1,154

 1,153

 1,152

 1,148

 1,142

 1,136

 1,127

 1,123

 1,128

 1,138

 1,155

 1,190

 1,235

 1,272

 1,296

 1,315

 1,339

 1,377

 1,415

 1,467

 1,534

 1,580

 1,633

 1,694

 1,763

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

JERSEY POINT TOP ON THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER
###### Editorial Note on Part 26

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 26 appear by T.D. ATF-451, 66 FR 21668, 21669, May 1, 2001.

#### § 26.170 Drawback of tax.

Any person who brings eligible articles into the United States from Puerto Rico may claim drawback of the distilled spirits excise taxes paid on such articles as provided in this subpart.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7498

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

NEVILLE SYLVESTER LESLIE,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District

Judge. (CR-98-152)

Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: January 6, 2003

Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Neville Sylvester Leslie, Appellant Pro Se. Rebeca Hidalgo Bellows,

Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Neville Sylvester Leslie seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying reconsideration of its previous order denying relief

on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). An appeal may

not be taken to this court from the final order in a proceeding

under § 2255 unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate

of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a

district court dismisses a § 2255 motion solely on procedural

grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue unless the

movant can demonstrate both “(1) ‘that jurists of reason would find

it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the

denial of a constitutional right’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason

would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in

its procedural ruling.’” Rose v. Lee, 252 F. 3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.

2001) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), cert.

denied, 122 S.Ct. 318 (2001). We have reviewed the record and

conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Leslie

has not made the requisite showing. See United States v. Leslie,

No. CR-98-152 (E.D. Va. filed Aug. 21, 2002; entered Aug. 22,

2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
3

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process. 

DISMISSED
#### Charles Jaquiss, Appellant, *v.*Henry Hagner, et al., Respondents.

(Argued January 25, 1878;

decided February 5, 1878.)

This action was brought against defendants for alleged misconduct and neglect in the management by them, as *606attorneys, of a suit in favor of plaintiff against one Whipps.

The misconduct alleged was that defendants did not before judgment secure a lien on Whipps’ property. The complaint contained no allegation, and it did not appear on the trial that defendants could have procured such a lien, or that the cause of action was such that they could have filed a *lis pendens,*or procured an order of arrest or attachment. It appeared that the demand against Whipps was simply for money loaned. The cause was submitted to the jury who rendered a verdict for the defendants. *Held,*that the trial court might properly have nonsuited plaintiff and certainly he could not complain of the verdict.

*Charles Jaquiss,*appellant, in person.

*D. T. Walden*for respondent.

Earl, J.,

reads for affirmance. All concur except Andrews, J., absent.

Judgment affirmed.
You havereached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC)Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC.Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suite ofcataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications (CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in theevent that publications are no longer available from the original publishingagency site. (Historical purposes)

**Title:** CDCs health out loud [electronic resource]: a blog devoted to discussing best practices and questions about healthcommunication, social marketing, and health marketing. 

 

SuDoc: HE 20.7061/3:

Item Number: 0504-W-25 (online)

CGP system Number: 000865012

 

August 2010

September 2010

October 2010 

|December 2010

2011

March 2011

August 2011

October 2011

2012:

March 2012

May 2012
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, February 23, 2015. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, February 23, 2015 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A15I0118. TUSHANNA PURDIE COLE v. THE STATE.
Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby GRANTED. The Appellant may file a Notice of Appeal within 10 days of the date of this order. The Clerk of Superior Court is directed to include a copy of this order in the record transmitted to the Court of Appeals.
LC NUMBERS: 2014CR02373