alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §4646. Petition process

#### (a) In general

The Interagency Labor Committee shall establish procedures for submissions by the public of information with respect to potential failures to implement the labor obligations of a USMCA country.

#### (b) Facility-specific petitions

With respect to information submitted in accordance with the procedures established under subsection (a) accompanying a petition relating to a denial of rights at a covered facility, as such terms are defined for purposes of Annex 31–A of the USMCA:

(1) The Interagency Labor Committee shall review such information within 30 days of submission and shall determine whether there is sufficient, credible evidence of a denial of rights (as so defined) enabling the good-faith invocation of enforcement mechanisms.

(2) If the Committee reaches a negative determination under paragraph (1), the Committee shall certify such determination to the appropriate congressional committees and the petitioner.

(3) If the Committee reaches an affirmative determination under paragraph (1), the Trade Representative shall submit a request for review, in accordance with article 31–A.4 of such Annex, with respect to the covered facility and shall inform the petitioner and the appropriate congressional committees of the submission of such request.

(4) Not later than 60 days after the date of an affirmative determination under paragraph (1), the Trade Representative shall—

(A) determine whether to request the establishment of a rapid response labor panel in accordance with such Annex; and

(B) if such determination is negative, certify such determination to the appropriate congressional committees in conjunction with the reasons for such determination and the details of any agreed-upon remediation plan.

#### (c) Other petitions

With respect to information submitted in accordance with the procedures established under subsection (a) accompanying a petition relating to any other violation of the labor obligations of a USMCA country:

(1) The Interagency Labor Committee shall review such information not later than 20 days after the date of the submission and shall determine whether the information warrants further review.

(2) If the Committee reaches an affirmative determination under paragraph (1), such further review shall focus exclusively on determining, not later than 60 days after the date of such submission, whether there is sufficient, credible evidence that the USMCA country is in violation of its labor obligations, for purposes of initiating enforcement action under chapter 23 or chapter 31 of the USMCA.

(3) If the Committee reaches an affirmative determination under paragraph (2), the Trade Representative shall—

(A) not later than 60 days after the date of the determination of the Committee, initiate appropriate enforcement action under such chapter 23 or chapter 31; or

(B) submit to the appropriate congressional committees a notification including the reasons for which action was not initiated within such 60-day period.

(Pub. L. 116–113, title VII, §716, Jan. 29, 2020, 134 Stat. 83.)
#### Anga M. Sundberg, Respondent, v. Yonkers Savings Bank, Appellant.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Ho opinion. Present —Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Carr and Putnam, JJ.
(No. 74-CC-471

#### Buske Lines, Inc., Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Law Enforcement, Respondent.

*Opinion filed April 17, 1974.*

Buske Lines, Inc., Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; William E. Webber, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
#### § 10.11 Who maintains custody and control of FECA records?

All records relating to claims for benefits filed under the FECA, including any copies of such records maintained by an employing agency, are covered by the government-wide Privacy Act system of records entitled DOL/GOVT-1 (Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, Federal Employees' Compensation Act File). This system of records is maintained by and under the control of OWCP, and, as such, all records covered by DOL/GOVT-1 are official records of OWCP. The protection, release, inspection and copying of records covered by DOL/GOVT-1 shall be accomplished in accordance with the rules, guidelines and provisions of this part, as well as those contained in 29 CFR parts 70 and 71, and with the notice of the system of records and routine uses published in the Federal Register. All questions relating to access/disclosure, and/or amendment of FECA records maintained by OWCP or the employing agency, are to be resolved in accordance with this section.
#### Tommie WHAYNE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America; et al., Defendants — Appellees.

No. 05-15951.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 2006.*

Filed Feb. 17, 2006.

Tommie Whayne, Las Vegas, NV, pro se.

*164Before: FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Tommie Whayne appeals pro se from the judgment of the district court dismissing for improper venue his action alleging, among other things, that the United States and other entities committed various acts of wrongdoing against him with respect to the calculation and payment of his Social Security benefits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for improper venue. *Bruns v. Nat’l Credit Union Admin.,*122 F.3d 1251, 1253 (9th Cir. 1997). We affirm.

The district court correctly dismissed Whayne’s action for improper venue because neither Whayne nor any defendant resided in the Northern District of California, and no events or omissions giving rise to Whayne’s claims occurred in the Northern District. *See*28 U.S.C. § 1391(e).

Whayne’s “motion to quash” the Appellate Commissioner’s August 17, 2005 order is denied.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### § 211.11 Miscellaneous pay.

Any payment made to an employee by an employer which is excluded from compensation under the Railroad Retirement Act, but which is subject to taxes under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act, shall be considered compensation for purposes of this part but only for the limited purpose of computing the portion of the annuity computed under section 3(a), 4(a), or 4(f) of the Railroad Retirement Act (commonly called the tier I component).

[58 FR 45251, Aug. 27, 1993]
---

Exhibit 99.15 Date: March 31, 2010 CONSENT OF NEIL BURNS United States Securities and Exchange Commission Gentlemen: In connection with Silver  Wheaton  Corp.s  (the  Company)  Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the  Annual   Report),  I, Neil  Burns, M.Sc., P.Geo., Director of  Geology (Silver Wheaton Corp.),  hereby consent to the inclusion in, or incorporation by reference into,  and  the  use of my name in connection with the preparation of  the  following documents  / reports: 1.
  Resource  estimates  of the Yauliyacu Mine;2.
  Technical report dated  March  26, 2010, entitled 2009 Resource  and Reserve Update, Yauliyacu  Mine,  Peru;3.
      The Annual Report;4.
  The Companys  Registration statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-128128).
  Yours truly,/s/ Neil BurnsNeil Burns, M.Sc., P.Geo.Director of GeologySilver Wheaton Corp.


---
```

[113th Congress Public Law 182]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 128 STAT. 1918]]

Public Law 113-182
113th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To reauthorize programs authorized under the Debbie Smith Act of 2004, 
    and for other purposes. <<NOTE: Sept. 29, 2014 -  [H.R. 4323]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: Debbie Smith 
Reauthorization Act of 2014.>> 
SECTION 1. <<NOTE: 42 USC 13701 note.>>  SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Debbie Smith Reauthorization Act of 
2014''.
SEC. 2. GENERAL REAUTHORIZATION.

    Section 2 of the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 (42 
U.S.C. 14135) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (c)(3)--
                    (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``2010 through 
                2018'' and inserting ``2014 through 2019''; and
                    (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``2018'' and 
                inserting ``2019''; and
            (2) in subsection (j), by striking ``2009 through 2014'' and 
        inserting ``2015 through 2019''.
SEC. 3. TRAINING AND EDUCATION.

    Section 303(b) of the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 2004 (42 
U.S.C. 14136(b)) is amended by striking ``2009 through 2014'' and 
inserting ``2015 through 2019''.
SEC. 4. SEXUAL ASSAULT FORENSIC EXAM GRANTS.

    Section 304(c) of the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 2004 (42 
U.S.C. 14136a(c)) is amended by striking ``2009 through 2014'' and 
inserting ``2015 through 2019''.

    Approved September 29, 2014.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4323:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 113-404 (Comm. on the Judiciary).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 160 (2014):
            Apr. 7, considered and passed House.
            Sept. 18, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
|Exhibit 32.1

SECTION 906
CERTIFICATION BY DWIGHT O. SEEGMILLER

Pursuant to the  requirements  of
Section  906 of the  Sarbannes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  Dwight O.  Seegmiller  hereby
certifies that:

1.  This report fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the 1934 Act, and

2.  The information  contained in
this report fairly  presents,  in all material  respects,  the  registrants
financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|Date | 8/12/2003 | By |  | /s/
      Dwight O. Seegmiller       
|---- | --------- | -- |  | -------------------------------------
|     |           |    |  |                                      
|     |           |    |  | Dwight
      O. Seegmiller, President

|
|
#### Andre WILLIAMS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Vanessa ADAMS, Warden, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 05-7937.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 20, 2006.

Decided: July 24, 2006.

Andre Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Debra Jean Prillaman, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia; Michael Edward Lockridge, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Butner, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

*241Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Andre Williams, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Williams v. Adams,*No. CA-05-220-3 (E.D.Va. Oct. 18, 2005). 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.*
---

Exhibit 99.11

March 27, 2012

CONSENT OF PETER NAHAN

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

Gentlemen:

In connection with Silver Wheaton Corp.s (the Company)
Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2011 (the Annual
Report), I, Peter Nahan, MSc, AusIMM, Senior Evaluation Engineer, Goldcorp
Inc., hereby consent to the inclusion in, or incorporation by reference into,
the Annual Report and the Companys Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File
No. 333-128128) and Form F-10 (File No. 333-167567), of the following:

| | 1. | Reserve estimates of the Peñasquito Operation;
  and                                                                                                                          
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | 2. | Technical report dated December 31, 2010, entitled
      Penasquito Polymetallic Operation, Zacatecas State, Mexico NI 43-101
      Technical Reportfor Silver Wheaton Corp.

Yours truly,

/s/ Peter Nahan

Peter Nahan, MSc, AusIMM 
  Senior Evaluation Engineer, 
  Goldcorp Inc.

---
Editorial Note on Part 70
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 70 appear by T.D. ATF-450, 66 FR 29022-29030, May 29, 2001.

§ 70.111 Rules for application of assessable penalties. ( a ) *Penalty assessed as tax.* The penalties and liabilities provided by Subchapter B, Chapter 68, of the Internal Revenue Code shall be assessed and collected in the same manner as taxes. Except as otherwise provided, any reference in the Internal Revenue Code to “tax” imposed thereunder shall also be deemed to refer to the penalties and liabilities provided by Subchapter B of Chapter 68.
( b ) *Person defined.* For purposes of Subchapter B of Chapter 68 of the Internal Revenue Code, the term “person” includes an officer or employee of a corporation, or a member or employee of a partnership, who as such officer, employee, or member is under a duty to perform the act in respect of which the violation occurs.
(26 U.S.C. 6671)
[T.D. ATF-251, 52 FR 19314, May 22, 1987. Redesignated by T.D. ATF-301, 55 FR 47606, Nov. 14, 1990]
#### Angalo Pappastathis, Respondent, v. City of New York, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Glennon, J. P., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Van Voorhis, JJ.
#### Robitzek Investing Co., Inc., v. Colonial Beacon Oil Company.

Present — Martin, P. J., Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
#### Hector LOYA-LOYA, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent. Francisco Chavez-Arguelles, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General, Respondent. Francisco Chavez-Arguelles; Hector Loya-Loya, Petitioners, v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General, Respondent.

Nos. 03-74607, 03-74608.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted Oct. 19, 2005.

Decided Feb. 23, 2006.

Hilary A. Han, Esq., Victoria J. Dobrin, Esq., Dobrin & Han, LLC, Seattle, WA, for Petitioners.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, WWS-District Counsel, Immigration and Naturalization Service Office of the District Counsel, Seattle, WA, Patricia A. Smith, Esq., DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: BRUNETTI and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges, and KING,* Senior District Judge.

*

 The Honorable Samuel P. King, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Hawaii, sitting by designation.

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM **

In a prior Memorandum, we dismissed in part (asylum), held in abeyance in part (withholding of removal), and denied in part (Convention Against Torture) petitioners’ direct appeal petitions (Nos. 03-74607 and 03-74608); and we granted peti*836tioners’ motion to reopen petition (No. 04-74012) and remanded to the Board of Immigration Appeals for reconsideration of petitioners’ motion to reopen. On remand, the BIA vacated its prior decision, reopened removal proceedings, and remanded to the Immigration Judge for further consideration of petitioners’ applications for asylum and withholding of removal.

In light of the BIA’s decision, the remaining claims in case numbers 03-74607 and 03-74608 are moot and are hereby

DISMISSED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
/s/ Marvin R. RichardsonMarvin R. RichardsonChief Executive Officer
###### Editorial Note on Part 479

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 479 appear by T.D. ATF-487, 68 FR 3752, Jan. 24, 2003.

#### § 479.25 Collector's items.

The Director shall determine in accordance with 26 U.S.C. 5845(a), whether a firearm or device, which although originally designed as a weapon, is by reason of the date of its manufacture, value, design, and other characteristics primarily a collector's item and is not likely to be used as a weapon. A person who desires to obtain a determination under that provision of law shall follow the procedures prescribed in § 479.24 relating to destructive device determinations, and shall include information as to date of manufacture, value, design and other characteristics which would sustain a finding that the firearm or device is primarily a collector's item and is not likely to be used as a weapon.

[36 FR 14256, Aug. 3, 1971. Redesignated at 40 FR 16835, Apr. 15, 1975, and amended by T.D. ATF-48, 44 FR 55842, Sept. 28, 1979]
# Official Journal L 98/2012

| | ISSN 1977-0677
  doi:10.3000/19770677.L_2012.098.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 98 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 554 April 2012 |

ISSN 1977-0677

doi:10.3000/19770677.L_2012.098.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 98

English edition

Legislation

Volume 554 April 2012

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 293/2012 of 3 April 2012 on monitoring and reporting of data on the registration of new light commercial vehicles pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 510/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) | 1 |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 294/2012 of 3 April 2012 amending Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 implementing Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the increased level of official controls on imports of certain feed and food of non-animal origin (1) | 7 |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 295/2012 of 3 April 2012 amending Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 establishing the Community list of air carriers which are subject to an operating ban within the Community (1) | 13 |
| | | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 296/2012 of 3 April 2012 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables | 36 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 293/2012 of 3 April 2012 on monitoring and reporting of data on the registration of new light commercial vehicles pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 510/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1)

1

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 294/2012 of 3 April 2012 amending Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 669/2009 implementing Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the increased level of official controls on imports of certain feed and food of non-animal origin (1)

7

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 295/2012 of 3 April 2012 amending Regulation (EC) No 474/2006 establishing the Community list of air carriers which are subject to an operating ban within the Community (1)

13

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 296/2012 of 3 April 2012 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

36

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
§ 225.11 Tier I PIA. ( a ) *General.* The Tier I PIA is used in computing an employee, spouse or divorced spouse tier I amount. Except for the cases described in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section, a Tier I PIA is determined under sections 215 and 223 of the Social Security Act. Railroad and Social Security earnings are included in the calculation of a Tier I PIA.
( b ) *Employee attains age 60 and/or acquires 30 years of service after June 30, 1984.* When an employee is entitled to an age and service annuity before the month of attaining age 62, as explained in part 216 of this chapter, the following Railroad Retirement Act rules apply in addition to those in § 225.11(a) in computing the Tier I PIA. ( 1 ) Four months before the first full month the employee is age 62, the Average Indexed Monthly Earnings is determined as if the employee's eligibility year were the year the annuity began.
( 2 ) The benefit computation years used in computing the Tier I PIA are based on the date of the employee's actual attainment of age 62.
( 3 ) The Tier I PIA is adjusted when the employee reaches age 62 to use the year in which the employee attains age 62 as the eligibility year.
( 4 ) Cost-of-living increases and recomputations apply after the employee attains age 62.
( c ) *Employee attains age 60 and acquires 30 years of service before July 1, 1984.* For purposes of determining the benefit computation years to be used in computing the Tier I PIA for an employee who is age 60 through 64, and who both has 30 years of service and attains age 60 prior to July 1, 1984, the employee is considered to be age 65 when the age and service annuity begins. For purposes of computing the Average Indexed Monthly Earnings, the eligibility year is the year the annuity begins or age 62, if earlier. Cost-of-living increases are paid from the year the annuity begins. Recomputations are paid after the employee actually attain age 62.
( d ) *Disability annuity.* When an employee is entitled to a disability annuity, as explained in subpart B of part 216 of this chapter, the following Railroad Retirement Act rule applies in addition to those in § 225.11(a) in computing the Tier I PIA. The Tier I PIA is computed as if the employee were 62 years old on the date, as determined by the Board, of onset of disability, if the employee is under age 62 on that date.
§ 771.78 Revocation or denial of renewal. ( a ) The administrative law judge who presides at the hearing in proceedings for the revocation or denial of renewal of licenses or permits shall make a recommended decision to the Director of Industry Operations. The administrative law judge shall certify the complete record of the proceedings before him and shall immediately forward the complete certified record to the Director of Industry Operations. The administrative law judge shall also send one copy of his recommended decision to the licensee or permittee or the licensee's or permittee's representative, one copy to the Attorney for the Government, and one copy to the Director of Industry Operations, who shall make the initial decision as provided in § 771.109.
( b ) If no hearing is requested, the Director of Industry Operations shall make the initial decision.