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

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5113 

To make a technical amendment to the Violence Against Women Act of 

1994, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 16, 2022 

Ms. HIRONO introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To make a technical amendment to the Violence Against 

Women Act of 1994, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘VAWA Technical 

5 Amendment Act of 2022’’. 

6 SEC. 2. GRANTS TO COMBAT VIOLENT CRIMES. 

7 (a) AMENDMENT.—Section 2001(d) of title I of the 

8 Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 

9 U.S.C. 10441(d)) is amended— 

10 (1) in paragraph (1)— 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 5113 IS

1 (A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ‘‘or 

2 Native Hawaiian’’ after ‘‘Indian’’; 

3 (B) in subparagarph (B), by inserting ‘‘or 

4 Native Hawaiian’’ after ‘‘Indian’’; 

5 (C) in subparagraph (C)— 

6 (i) by inserting ‘‘or Native Hawaiian 

7 communities’’ after ‘‘tribal communities’’; 

8 and 

9 (ii) by inserting ‘‘or Native Hawaiian’’ 

10 after ‘‘Indian’’; and 

11 (D) in subparagraph (D)— 

12 (i) by inserting ‘‘or Native Hawaiian 

13 communities’’ after ‘‘Indian tribes’’; and 

14 (ii) by inserting ‘‘or Native Hawaiian’’ 

15 after ‘‘against Indian’’; 

16 (2) in paragraph (2)— 

17 (A) in subparagraph (A)(iii), by inserting 

18 ‘‘or Native Hawaiian communities’’ after ‘‘In19 dian tribes’’; and 

20 (B) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ‘‘or 

21 Native Hawaiian communities’’ after ‘‘Indian 

22 tribes’’; and 

23 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

24 ‘‘(6) NATIVE HAWAIIAN DEFINED.—In this sub25 section, the term ‘Native Hawaiian’ has the meaning 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 5113 IS

1 given that term in section 801 of the Native Amer2 ican Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 

3 of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4221).’’. 

4 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— 

5 Section 40002(a)(42) of the Violence Against Women Act 

6 of 1994 (34 U.S.C. 12291(a)(42)) is amended— 

7 (1) in subparagraph (A)— 

8 (A) by inserting ‘‘, Native Hawaiian orga9 nizations, or the Native Hawaiian community’’ 

10 after ‘‘Indian service providers’’; 

11 (B) by inserting ‘‘, organizations, or com12 munities’’ after ‘‘member providers’’; and 

13 (C) by inserting ‘‘or Native Hawaiian’’ 

14 after ‘‘designed to assist Indian’’; and 

15 (2) in subparagraph (B)— 

16 (A) in clause (i), by inserting ‘‘, organiza17 tions, or communities’’ after ‘‘member service 

18 providers’’; and 

19 (B) in clause (ii), by inserting ‘‘or Native 

20 Hawaiian communities’’ after ‘‘tribal commu21 nities’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
EXHIBIT D

THE LETTER

Case 1:20-cv-22393-CMA Document 1-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2020 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-22393-CMA Document 1-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2020 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-22393-CMA Document 1-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2020 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:20-cv-22393-CMA Document 1-4 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/10/2020 Page 4 of 4
|                                                                                        Exhibit23.1 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Consent of Independent Auditor

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No.’s 333-87236 and 333-105187 andForm S-3 No. 333-109108) pertaining to the 2002 Stock Incentive Plan, the 2003 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, and the 4.25%Convertible Notes, respectively, of ExpressJet Holdings, Inc., of our report dated January 16, 2004, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements and schedule of ExpressJet Holdings, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the yearended December 31, 2003.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Houston, TexasFebruary 13, 2004
- Skip to global NPS navigation
    - Skip to the main content
    - Skip to the footer section

National Park Service**Search

# **OpenMenu**CloseMenu

## Explore This Park

## Explore the National Park Service

## Exiting nps.gov

#### Contact Us

Thing to Do

# Spotting Wildlife in the Badlands

Badlands National Park
§ 123.200 Am I eligible to apply for a physical disaster business loan? ( a ) Almost any business concern or charitable or other non-profit entity whose real or tangible personal property is damaged in a declared disaster area is eligible to apply for a physical disaster business loan. Your business may be a sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, or other legal entity recognized under State law. Your business' size (average annual receipts or number of employees) is not taken into consideration in determining your eligibility for a physical disaster business loan. If your damaged business occupied rented space at the time of the disaster, and the terms of your business' lease require you to make repairs to your business' building, you may have suffered a physical loss and can apply for a physical business disaster loan to repair the property. In all other cases, the owner of the building is the eligible loan applicant.
( b ) Damaged vehicles, of the type normally used for recreational purposes, such as motorhomes, aircraft, and boats, may be repaired or replaced with SBA loan proceeds if you can submit evidence that the damaged vehicles were used in your business at the time of the disaster.
#### § 123.17 Do other Federal requirements apply?

As a condition of disbursement, you must be in compliance with certain requirements relating to flood insurance, earthquake hazards, coastal barrier islands, and child support obligations, as set forth in §§ 120.170 through 120.172, 120.174 and 120.175 of this chapter.

[61 FR 3304, Jan. 31, 1996, as amended at 87 FR 38910, June 30, 2022]
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to the footer section




National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Technical Preservation Services





Contact Us
  Preserving our nation's historic buildings Technical Preservation Services develops historic preservation standards and guidance on preserving and rehabilitating historic buildings, administers the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives program for rehabilitating historic buildings, and sets the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. **New NPS Resources on Sustainability, Energy Efficiency, Resilience, and Historic Buildings (April 15, 2024)** *Banner photo: The Bottleworks, Indianapolis, Indiana, Susan Fleck; Courtesy RATIO Design and Hendricks Commericial Properties*
 photo of the interior of a factoryContact Us Contact the TPS office and staff
 photo of a buildingKeep in touch with TPS Subscribe to  news and updates from TPS
 photo of a parking garageLatest News Get the latest TPS news
 photo of a decorative porchHistoric Preservation Tax Incentives Find program guidance, download the Historic Preservation Certification Application, and more
 photo of a factory buildingSecretary of the Interior's Standards Explore the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines
 Photo of Georgianna Plantation, MississippiTPS Publications Read the Preservation Briefs and more
 Photo of Parkside CandiesHistoric Surplus Property Program See how state and local governments can reuse Federal historic properties
 photo of a log cabinSustainability Learn why “the greenest building is the one that’s already built”
 photo of a hotel entrancePreservation by Topic Index Index to Technical Preservation Services guidance and information
 Last updated: April 13, 2024
 Tools Site Index
Contact Us


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
#### § 4300.23 After I file my application, can I use the land before BLM issues my permit?

No. You cannot use the land until BLM issues you a permit. Generally, BLM will issue a permit within 120 days after receiving an application and will keep you informed if there are delays in meeting that timeframe.
Editorial Note on Part 121
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 121 appear at 72 FR 50039 and 50040, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 121.502 What size standards are applicable to programs for sales or leases of Government property? ( a ) Unless otherwise specified in this part— ( 1 ) A concern primarily engaged in manufacturing is small for sales or leases of Government property if it does not exceed 500 employees;
( 2 ) A concern not primarily engaged in manufacturing is small for sales or leases of Government property if it has annual receipts not exceeding $9 million.
( b ) Size status for such sales and leases is determined by the primary industry of the applicant business concern.
[61 FR 3286, Jan. 31, 1996, as amended at 67 FR 3056, Jan. 23, 2002; 70 FR 72594, Dec. 6, 2005; 73 FR 41254, July 18, 2008; 79 FR 33669, June 12, 2014; 84 FR 34281, July 18, 2019; 87 FR 69154, Nov. 17, 2022]
#### In the Matter of the Application of Edgar J. Bernheimer et al., Attorneys at Law, Respondents, for Enforcement of a Lien upon Awards Obtained in a Condemnation Proceeding. 35 Steuben Street Realty Corporation et al, Appellants.

Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.
### §107. Nebraska

Nebraska constitutes one judicial district.

Court shall be held at Lincoln, North Platte, and Omaha.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 884; Aug. 9, 1955, ch. 627, §1, 69 Stat. 546.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §173 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, §93, 36 Stat. 1118).

Provisions for furnishing rooms and accommodations at the various places for holding court were omitted as obsolete upon advice of Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts that Federal accommodations are now available at such places.

A provision relating to the appointment and residence of deputy clerks and the places for keeping offices was omitted as covered by section 751 of this title.

The county of Arthur in the North Platte Division was created since the enactment of the Judicial Code.

Changes in arrangement and phraseology were made.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1955—Act Aug. 9, 1955, struck out the separate divisions of the district and reduced the number of places of holding terms.

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

#### Effective Date of 1955 Amendment

Act Aug. 9, 1955, ch. 627, §2, 69 Stat. 546, provided that: "The amendment made by the first section of this Act [amending this section] shall take effect on September 1, 1955."
###### Editorial Note on Part 120

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 120.333 Are there any special credit criteria?

In addition to regular credit evaluation criteria, SBA shall weigh the greater risk associated with energy projects. SBA shall consider such factors as quality of the product or service, technical qualifications of the applicant's management, sales projections, and financial status.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6683

TRACY GLENN JACKSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-588-5-BR)

Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 2, 1998

Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tracy Glenn Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Tracy Glenn Jackson appeals the district court’s order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. Jackson v. North Carolina, No. CA-97-588-5-BR (E.D.N.C.

Mar. 4, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
Order entered July 30, 2018

In The



## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 17

- 01457

- CV

CHARLES CHANG, M.D., Appellant

V.

ASHLEY DENNY, Appellee

On Appeal from the 401st Judicia l District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 401

- 02470

- 2013



### O RDER

B e fo re the Court is appellant’s unopposed motion for extension of time to file reply brief

.

We GRANT the motion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than September 5, 2018

.

/s/ DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE
Editorial Note on Part 121
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 121 appear at 72 FR 50039 and 50040, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 121.106 How does SBA calculate number of employees? ( a ) In determining a concern's number of employees, SBA counts all individuals employed on a full-time, part-time, or other basis. This includes employees obtained from a temporary employee agency, professional employee organization or leasing concern. SBA will consider the totality of the circumstances, including criteria used by the IRS for Federal income tax purposes, in determining whether individuals are employees of a concern. Volunteers (*i.e.*, individuals who receive no compensation, including no in-kind compensation, for work performed) are not considered employees.
( b ) Where the size standard is number of employees, the method for determining a concern's size includes the following principles: ( 1 ) The average number of employees of the concern is used (including the employees of its domestic and foreign affiliates) based upon numbers of employees for each of the pay periods for the preceding completed 24 calendar months.
( 2 ) Part-time and temporary employees are counted the same as full-time employees.
( 3 ) If a concern has not been in business for 24 months, the average number of employees is used for each of the pay periods during which it has been in business.
( 4 ) ( i ) The average number of employees of a business concern with affiliates is calculated by adding the average number of employees of the business concern with the average number of employees of each affiliate. If a concern has acquired an affiliate or been acquired as an affiliate during the applicable period of measurement or before the date on which it self-certified as small, the employees counted in determining size status include the employees of the acquired or acquiring concern. Furthermore, this aggregation applies for the entire period of measurement, not just the period after the affiliation arose.
( ii ) The employees of a former affiliate are not counted if affiliation ceased before the date used for determining size. This exclusion of employees of a former affiliate applies during the entire period of measurement, rather than only for the period after which affiliation ceased. However, if a concern has sold a segregable division to another business concern during the applicable period of measurement or before the date on which it self-certified as small, the employees used in determining size status will continue to include the employees of the division that was sold.
[61 FR 3286, Jan. 31, 1996, as amended at 69 FR 29203, May 21, 2004; 84 FR 66579, Dec. 5, 2019; 87 FR 34120, June 6, 2022]
Case 1:20-cv-22434-JEM   Document 25-1   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2020   Page 1 of 3

Case 1:20-cv-22434-JEM   Document 25-1   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2020   Page 2 of 3

Case 1:20-cv-22434-JEM   Document 25-1   Entered on FLSD Docket 08/05/2020   Page 3 of 3
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 22, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-10471 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus GUILLERMO RAMIREZ-LABRA, also known as Juan Cruz-Herrera, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:02-CR-00043-ALL-C

-------------------- Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Guillermo Ramirez-Labra appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Ramirez-Labra contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) define separate offenses. He argues that the prior conviction that resulted in his increased sentence is an element of a separate offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) that should haveNo. 03-10471 -2- been alleged in his indictment. Ramirez-Labra maintains that he pleaded guilty to an indictment which charged only simple reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He argues that his sentence exceeds the term of imprisonment and supervised release which may be imposed for that offense.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Ramirez-Labra acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 06-1910
THERESA SPARROW, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. William A. Webb, Magistrate Judge. (4:05-cv-00150-WW) Submitted: July 25, 2007 Decided: August 10, 2007 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brian M. Ricci, EDWARDS & RICCI, PA, Greenville, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E.B. Holding, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Joshua B. Royster, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.* The parties consented to the exercise of jurisdiction by the magistrate judge. - 2 - PER CURIAM: Theresa Sparrow appeals the order of the magistrate judge upholding the denial of disability insurance benefits. *We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the magistrate judge. Sparrow v. Astrue , No. 4:05-cv-00150-WW (E.D.N.C. Aug. 1, 2006). 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 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18. U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of E Med Future, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for
the period ending September 30, 2006 (the Report) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, the undersigned, being the Chief Financial Officer and Interim President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of § 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Donald Sullivan                  
|DONALD SULLIVAN                      
|CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER AND INTERIM  
|PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Date: November 13, 2006
Exhibit 10.1


 


 


 



     


     


    

 


 


 






    2


     


    

 


 


 






    3


     


    

 


 


 






    4


     


    

 


 


 






    5


     


    

 


 


 






    6
### SUBCHAPTER VI—EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 113–128, title IV, §461(1), (2), July 22, 2014, 128 Stat. 1679, amended this subchapter by striking out part A, consisting of sections 795 and 795a, and striking out the heading of part B preceding section 795g.

Title VI of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, comprising this subchapter, was originally added to Pub. L. 93–112 by Pub. L. 95–602, title II, §201, Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2989, and amended by Pub. L. 98–221, Feb. 22, 1984, 98 Stat. 17; Pub. L. 99–506, Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1807; Pub. L. 100–630, Nov. 7, 1988, 102 Stat. 3289; Pub. L. 102–52, June 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 260; Pub. L. 102–119, Oct. 7, 1991, 105 Stat. 587; Pub. L. 102–569, Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4344; Pub. L. 103–73, Aug. 11, 1993, 107 Stat. 718. Title VI is shown herein, however, as having been added by Pub. L. 105–220, title IV, §409, Aug. 7, 1998, 112 Stat. 1210, without reference to those intervening amendments because of the extensive revision of title VI by Pub. L. 105–220.