alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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

DAY HIGH

 116

 113

 113

 111

 108

 110

 133

 131

 147

 131

 122

 117

 114

 114

 109

 107

 108

 108

 108

 109

 109

 109

 109

 110

 110

 110

 108

 109

 109

 110

 109

 109

 107

 86

 99

 93

 102

 104

 101

 115

 114

 110

 110

 106

 105

 104

 104

 105

 105

 106

 106

 106

 105

 107

 107

 105

 105

 105

 105

 105

 112

 111

 109

 99

 104

 99

 110

 115

 128

 120

 118

 113

 112

 110

 107

 106

 106

 106

 106

 107

 107

 107

 108

 108

 108

 107

 106

 106

 106

 107

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

NOVEMBER 2002 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: December 9, 2002

HIGH LOW MEAN

 55.4

 54.6

 54.2

 55.7

 55.3

 55.5

 57.3

 59.4

 60.2

 59.2

 58.8

 58.2

 58.9

 58.0

 57.1

 57.3

 56.5

 55.9

 55.2

 55.6

 55.6

 56.4

 55.9

 56.2

 56.6

 54.8

 53.4

 52.7

 53.1

 52.1

 52.9

 51.6

 51.9

 51.8

 52.3

 52.9

 54.6

 56.5

 58.1

 58.2

 56.7

 56.3

 56.8

 56.2

 55.8

 55.7

 55.3

 53.9

 53.1

 53.6

 53.9

 54.4

 54.1

 55.1

 55.0

 52.9

 51.6

 50.8

 51.0

 51.2

 54.3

 53.3

 53.2

 53.7

 53.9

 54.2

 55.6

 58.2

 59.1

 58.6

 57.8

 57.4

 57.8

 57.2

 56.5

 56.4

 55.9

 54.9

 54.3

 54.6

 54.8

 55.4

 55.1

 55.6

 55.8

 53.9

 52.6

 51.9

 52.0

 51.7

HIGH LOW MEAN

 10.9

 11.3

 11.3

 11.4

 11.2

 11.1

 10.5

 9.0

 7.8

 8.0

 8.3

 8.9

 9.0

 10.0

 10.2

 10.4

 10.3

 10.6

 10.9

 10.7

 10.7

 10.5

 10.6

 10.4

 10.3

 10.8

 11.1

 11.4

 11.3

 11.2

 10.2

 10.7

 10.9

 10.7

 10.7

 10.5

 8.9

 7.0

 7.1

 7.0

 7.4

 7.9

 8.3

 8.4

 9.9

 10.0

 10.1

 10.2

 10.5

 10.3

 10.3

 10.1

 10.2

 10.1

 10.0

 10.2

 10.6

 10.9

 10.9

 11.0

 10.6

 11.0

 11.1

 11.0

 10.9

 10.8

 10.0

 8.1

 7.3

 7.6

 7.9

 8.5

 8.7

 9.2

 10.1

 10.2

 10.2

 10.4

 10.7

 10.5

 10.5

 10.3

 10.3

 10.2

 10.1

 10.5

 10.9

 11.1

 11.1

 11.1

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

RIPON ON THE STANISLAUS RIVER

 ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS WATER TEMPERATURE, DEG DISSOLVED OXYZEN, PPM
(No. 74-CC-183

#### Myrna Faye Mc Quade, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of General Services, Respondent.

*Opinion filed January 8, 1974.*

Myrna Faye Mc Quade, Claimant, pro se.

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

Per Curiam.
### §10423. Expedited review of export licenses for exports of advanced technologies to Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada

#### (a) In general

Not later than 180 days after December 22, 2023, the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, shall initiate a rulemaking to establish an expedited decision-making process, classified or unclassified, for applications to export to Australia, the United Kingdom, and Canada commercial, advanced-technology defense articles and defense services that are not covered by an exemption under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations.

#### (b) Eligibility

To qualify for the expedited decision-making process described in subsection (a), an application shall be for an export of defense articles or defense services that will take place wholly within or between the physical territory of Australia, Canada, or the United Kingdom and the United States and with governments or corporate entities from such countries.

#### (c) Availability of expedited process

The expedited decision-making process described in subsection (a) shall be available for both classified and unclassified items, and the process must satisfy the following criteria to the extent practicable:

(1) Any licensing application to export defense articles and services that is related to a government to government agreement must be approved, returned, or denied within 30 days of submission.

(2) For all other licensing requests, any review shall be completed not later than 45 calendar days after the date of application.

(Pub. L. 118–31, div. A, title XIII, §1344, Dec. 22, 2023, 137 Stat. 513.)
Editorial Note on Part 655
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 655 appear at 71 FR 35521, 35522, June 21, 2006.

§ 655.104 Successors in interest. ( a ) *Liability of successors in interest.* Where an employer, agent, or attorney has violated 8 U.S.C. 1188, 29 CFR part 501, or this subpart, a successor in interest to that employer, agent, or attorney may be held liable for the duties and obligations of the violating employer, agent, or attorney in certain circumstances, regardless of whether such successor in interest has succeeded to all the rights and liabilities of the predecessor employer, agent, or attorney.
( b ) *Definition of successors in interest.* The following factors, including those as used under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act, may be considered in determining whether an employer, agent, or attorney is a successor in interest; however, these factors are not exhaustive, and no one factor is dispositive, but all of the circumstances will be considered as a whole: ( 1 ) Substantial continuity of the same business operations;
( 2 ) Use of the same facilities;
( 3 ) Continuity of the work force;
( 4 ) Similarity of jobs and working conditions;
( 5 ) Similarity of supervisory personnel;
( 6 ) Whether the former management or owner retains a direct or indirect interest in the new enterprise;
( 7 ) Similarity in machinery, equipment, and production methods;
( 8 ) Similarity of products and services;
( 9 ) The ability of the predecessor to provide relief; and
( 10 ) For purposes of debarment, the personal involvement of the firm's ownership, management, supervisors, and others associated with the firm in the violation(s) at issue.
( c ) *Effect of debarment on successors in interest.* When an employer, agent, or attorney is debarred under § 655.182 or 29 CFR 501.20, any successor in interest to the debarred employer, agent, or attorney is also debarred. No application for H-2A workers may be filed by or on behalf of a successor in interest to a debarred employer, agent, or attorney, subject to the term limits set forth in § 655.182(c)(2). If the CO determines that an application for H-2A workers was filed by or on behalf of a successor in interest to a debarred employer, agent, or attorney during the period of debarment as set forth in § 655.182(c)(2), the CO will issue a Notice of Deficiency (NOD) pursuant to § 655.141 or deny the application pursuant to § 655.164, as appropriate depending upon the status of the H-2A application, solely on the basis that the entity is a successor in interest to a debarred employer, agent, or attorney. If the OFLC Administrator determines that a certification for H-2A workers was issued to a successor in interest to a debarred employer, the OFLC Administrator may revoke the certification pursuant to § 655.181(a). The employer, agent, or attorney may appeal its status as a successor in interest to the debarred entity, pursuant to the procedures for appeals of CO determinations at § 655.171.
[89 FR 34060, Apr. 29, 2024] Pre-Filing Procedures
#### § 653.504 Severability.

Should a court hold any portion of any provision of this part to be invalid, the provision will be construed so as to continue to give the maximum effect to the provision permitted by law, unless such holding is one of total invalidity or unenforceability, in which event the provision or subprovision will be severable from this part and will not affect the remainder thereof.

[88 FR 82730, Nov. 24, 2023]
§ 661.120 What are the roles of the local and State governmental partner in the governance of the workforce investment system? ( a ) Local areas should establish policies, interpretations, guidelines and definitions to implement provisions of title I of WIA to the extent that such policies, interpretations, guidelines and definitions are not inconsistent with the Act and the regulations issued under the Act, Federal statutes and regulations governing One-Stop partner programs, and with State policies.
( b ) States should establish policies, interpretations, guidelines and definitions to implement provisions of title I of WIA to the extent that such policies, interpretations, guidelines and definitions are not inconsistent with the Act and the regulations issued under the Act, as well as Federal statutes and regulations governing One-Stop partner programs.
EXHIBIT 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF BLACKROCK KELSO CAPITAL CORPORATION



|                       |  |              |          | 
|---------------------- |  | ------------ | -------- | 
|Name                   |  | Jurisdiction |         
|BKC ARS Blocker, Inc.  |  |              | Delaware | 
|BKC ASW Blocker, Inc.  |  |              | Delaware | 
|BKC CSP Blocker, Inc.  |  |              | Delaware | 
|BKC DVSH Blocker, Inc. |  |              | Delaware | 
|BKC MTCH Blocker, Inc. |  |              | Delaware | 
|BKC Sentry LLC.        |  |              | Delaware | 
|BKC WBS, LLC.          |  |              | Delaware | 

In addition, we may be deemed to control certain portfolio companies identified as Controlled
Investments in footnotes to the Consolidated Schedule of Investments at December 31, 2012 included in the Consolidated Financial Statements portion of BlackRock Kelso Capital Corporations Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2012.
### §3722. Repealed. Pub. L. 104–66, title II, §2201(a), Dec. 21, 1995, 109 Stat. 732

Section, Pub. L. 96–70, title I, §1312, Sept. 27, 1979, 93 Stat. 479, related to annual reports to President and Congress.
#### Earl M. CRANSTON, Appellant, v. J. Hugo ARONSON, et al., Appellees.

No. 13982.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

Sept. 16, 1954.

Ralph J. Anderson, Myles J. Thomas, Helena, Montana, for appellant.

Arnold H. Olsen, Atty. Gen. of Montana, William F. Crowley, Asst. Atty. Gen. of Montana, Helena, Montana, for appellees.

Before HEALY, POPE and FEE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed upon the grounds and for the reasons stated in the opinion of Judge Murray in the District Court, Cranston v. Aronson, 124 F.Supp. 453.

During the argument in this court it was disclosed that the Supreme Court of Montana now has under submission a cause involving among others, the same question which appellant sought to present in the court below. As appellant, who is only a prospective bidder for a state lease, must lean heavily upon the Declaratory Judgments Act, 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 2201, 2202, the fact that the merits of appellant’s complaint have been argued in the state court is an additional reason for the district court’s denial of relief. “The extent to which the declaratory judgment procedure may be used in the federal courts to control state action lies in the sound discretion of the Court.” Alabama State Federation of Labor v. McAdory, 325 U.S. 450, 471, 65 S.Ct. 1384, 1394, 89 L.Ed. 1725. Cf. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. Huffman, 319 U.S. 293, 298, 300, 63 S.Ct. 1070, 87 L.Ed. 1407; Kerotest Mfg. Co. v. C-O-Two Co., 342 U.S. 180, 183, 72 S.Ct. 219, 96 L.Ed. 200.
### §2736b. Leadership engagement and accountability

#### (a) Reward and recognize efforts to promote diversity and inclusion

#### (1) In general

The Secretary shall implement performance and advancement requirements that reward and recognize the efforts of individuals in senior positions and supervisors in the Department in fostering an inclusive environment and cultivating talent consistent with merit system principles, such as through participation in mentoring programs or sponsorship initiatives, recruitment events, and other similar opportunities.

#### (2) Outreach events

The Secretary shall create opportunities for individuals in senior positions and supervisors in the Department to participate in outreach events and to discuss issues relating to diversity and inclusion with the workforce on a regular basis, including with employee resource groups.

#### (b) External advisory committees and boards

For each external advisory committee or board to which individuals in senior positions in the Department appoint members, the Secretary is strongly encouraged by Congress to ensure such external advisory committee or board is developed, reviewed, and carried out by qualified teams that represent the diversity of the organization.

(Pub. L. 117–81, div. E, title LIV, §5404, Dec. 27, 2021, 135 Stat. 2373.)

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

#### Definitions

For definitions of "Secretary" and "Department" as used in this section, see section 5002 of Pub. L. 117–81, set out as a note under section 263c of this title.

For definitions of "diversity" and "workforce" as used in this section, see section 5401 of Pub. L. 117–81, set out as a note under section 2736 of this title.
#### American Stone Renovating and Stucco Company, Respondent, v. John A. Garver and Others, Defendants, Impleaded with John E. Van Nostrand, Appellant.

Judgement in so far as appealed from affirmed, with costs, on authority of *Toop*v. *Smith*(181 N. Y. 283, 287). Carr, Rich, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred; Jenks, P. J., taking no part.
### §1642e. Claims based on ownership interest in corporations or other legal entities

#### (a) Nationals of United States

A claim under section 1642c of this title, based upon an ownership interest in any corporation, association, or other entity which is a national of the United States shall be denied.

#### (b) Direct ownership

A claim under section 1642c of this title, based upon a direct ownership interest in a corporation, association, or other entity for loss by reason of the nationalization or other taking of such corporation, association, or other entity, or the property thereof, shall be allowed, subject to other provisions of this subchapter, if such corporation, association, or other entity on the date of the nationalization or other taking was not a national of the United States, without regard to the per centum of ownership vested in the claimant in any such claim.

#### (c) Indirect ownership

A claim under section 1642c of this title, based upon an indirect ownership interest in a corporation, association, or other entity for loss by reason of the nationalization or other taking of such corporation, association, or other entity, or the property thereof, shall be allowed, subject to other provisions of this subchapter, only if at least 25 per centum of the entire ownership interest thereof at the time of such nationalization or other taking was vested in nationals of the United States.

#### (d) Computation of award

Any award on a claim under subsection (b) or (c) of this section shall be calculated on the basis of the total loss suffered by such corporation, association, or other entity, and shall bear the same proportion to such loss as the ownership interest of the claimant bears to the entire ownership interest thereof.

(Mar. 10, 1950, ch. 54, title IV, §406, as added Pub. L. 85–604, §1, Aug. 8, 1958, 72 Stat. 529.)
### §4051. Voluntary retirement

Any participant who is at least 50 years of age and has 20 years of creditable service, including at least 5 years of service credit toward retirement under the System (excluding military and naval service), may on his or her own application and with the consent of the Secretary be retired from the Service and receive retirement benefits in accordance with section 4046 of this title. The Secretary shall withhold consent for retirement under this section by any participant who has not been a member of the Service for 5 years. Any participant who voluntarily separates from the Service before completing 5 years in the System and who, on the date of separation, would be eligible for an annuity, based on a voluntary separation, under section 8336 or 8338 of title 5, if the participant had been covered under the Civil Service Retirement System rather than subject to this subchapter while a member of the Service, may receive an annuity under section 8336 or 8338, notwithstanding section 8333(b) of title 5, if all contributions transferred to the Fund under section 4045(c)(1) of this title, as well as all contributions withheld from the participant's pay or contributed by the employer, and deposited into the Fund during the period he or she was subject to this subchapter, including interest on these amounts, are transferred to the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund effective on the date the participant separates from the Service.

(Pub. L. 96–465, title I, §811, Oct. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 2112; Pub. L. 100–238, title II, §216, Jan. 8, 1988, 101 Stat. 1774.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1988—Pub. L. 100–238 inserted last two sentences relating to withholding consent to retirement and to certain participants who voluntarily separate from the Service before completing 5 years in the System.

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

#### Effective Date of 1988 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–238 effective 90 days after Jan. 8, 1988, see section 261(a) of Pub. L. 100–238, set out as a note under section 4054 of this title.
### §283z–6. Investment in human capital

#### (a) In general

The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States Executive Director of the Inter-American Development Bank to propose and use the voice and vote of such director, during the 4-year period beginning on January 1, 1990, to vigorously promote an increase in the proportion of Bank lending in support of projects and programs which support investments in human capital and to seek the rapid implementation by the Bank of systematic mechanisms of consultation with locally affected populations in borrower countries either directly or through appropriate representative non-governmental organizations.

#### (b) "Investments in human capital" defined

As used in subsection (a), the term "investments in human capital" means investments in projects, policies, and programs designed to improve urban and rural health care and sanitation, basic nutrition, education, the small-producer private sector, the economic activities of women, and the development of indigenous non-governmental organizations.

(Pub. L. 86–147, §34, as added Pub. L. 101–240, title II, §202(a), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2498.)

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

#### Report to Congress

Pub. L. 101–240, title II, §202(b), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2498, provided that the Chairman of the National Advisory Council on International Monetary and Financial Policies would include in the report required by section 262r of this title for fiscal year 1991 a report on the efforts undertaken by the United States Executive Director of the Inter-American Development Bank in achieving the objectives of this section.
#### Robert GEVORGYAN, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-76526.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 2006.*

Decided Feb. 22, 2006.

*818Areg Kazaryan, Law Office of Areg Kazaryan, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

District Counsel, -Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Keith Bernstein, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: 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 **

Robert Gevorgyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings conducted in absentia. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *Singh v. INS,*213 F.3d 1050, 1052 (9th Cir.2000), and we deny the petition for review.

The IJ did not abuse her discretion by denying Gevorgyan’s motion to reopen where the accompanying medical documents did not indicate whether his lumbar disc problem was serious, and therefore he did not demonstrate that his failure to appear at his hearing was due to “exceptional circumstances.” *See*8 U.S.C. § 1229a(e)(l); *Celis-Castellano v. Ashcroft,*298 F.3d 888, 891-92 (9th Cir.2002).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED

**

 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.
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

 Docket Number: FAA-2012-1003

 Directorate Identifier: 2012NM064AD

84-26-08, RA --- 5/12/11

84-26-12. RA --- 12/13/11

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
### §5956. Repealed. Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title XIII, §1308(g)(1)(A)], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–343

Section, Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title XII, §1207, Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1782; Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XII, §§1202, 1208(b), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2882, 2887; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, §1504(a)(7), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 513, required submission of semiannual report.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 30, 2013

s0923 

# Order

Clerk September 30, 2013

147249

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHI GAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 147249

COA: 308711

Wayne CC: 11

- 005883

- FC

JOHN HENRY SIMS,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 16, 2013

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
### §2734d. Recruitment and retention of individuals who have lived, worked, or studied in predominantly Muslim countries or communities

#### (a) Findings

Congress finds that successful engagement, including robust public diplomacy, with predominantly Muslim countries and communities is critical for achieving United States foreign policy objectives.

#### (b) Sense of Congress

It is the sense of Congress that the Department should recruit more employees that have a personal background in, and thorough understating 1 of, the cultures, languages, and history of the Middle East and wider Muslim world.

#### (c) Recruitment and retention of certain individuals

The Secretary shall make every effort to recruit and retain individuals that have lived, worked, or studied in predominantly Muslim countries or communities, including individuals who have studied at an Islamic institution of higher learning.

(Pub. L. 114–323, title VII, §713, Dec. 16, 2016, 130 Stat. 1945.)

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

#### Definitions

For definitions of "Department" and "Secretary" as used in this section, see section 2 of Pub. L. 114–323, set out as a note under section 2651 of this title.

1 So in original. Probably should be "understanding".