alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.741 Third country transportation. ( a ) *General.* A good that has undergone production necessary to qualify as an originating good under § 10.730 of this subpart will not be considered an originating good if, subsequent to that production, the good undergoes further production or any other operation outside the territories of the Parties, other than unloading, reloading, or any other operation necessary to preserve the good in good condition or to transport the good to the territory of a Party.
( b ) *Documentary evidence.* An importer making a claim that a good is originating may be required to demonstrate, to CBP's satisfaction, that no further production or subsequent operation, other than permitted under paragraph (a) of this section, occurred outside the territories of the Parties. An importer may demonstrate compliance with this section by submitting documentary evidence. Such evidence may include, but is not limited to, bills of lading, airway bills, packing lists, commercial invoices, receiving and inventory records, and customs entry and exit documents.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 200 (Monday, October 18, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61402-61403]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23269]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service


Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), Beaufort Sea Oil and Gas Lease 
Sale 195

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service (MMS), Interior.

ACTION: Availability of the proposed notice of sale.

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

SUMMARY: Alaska OCS, Beaufort Sea; Notice of Availability of the 
proposed Notice of Sale for proposed Oil and Gas Lease Sale 195 in the 
Beaufort Sea. This Notice is published pursuant to 30 CFR 256.29(c) as 
a matter of information to the public.
    With regard to oil and gas leasing on the OCS, the Secretary of the 
Interior, pursuant to section 19 of the OCS Lands Act, provides the 
affected States the opportunity to review the proposed Notice. The 
proposed Notice sets forth the proposed terms and conditions of the 
sale, including minimum bids, royalty rates, and rentals.
    The proposed Notice of Sale for Sale 195 and a ``Proposed Sale 
Notice Package'' containing information essential to potential bidders 
may be obtained by mail from the Alaska OCS Region, Information 
Resource Center,

[[Page 61403]]

Minerals Management Service, 949 East 36th Avenue, Room 330, Anchorage, 
Alaska 99508-4302. Telephone: (907) 271-6070 or 1-800-764-2627. Certain 
documents may be viewed and downloaded from the MMS World Wide Web site 
at http://www.mms.gov/alaska.
    The final Notice of Sale will be published in the Federal Register 
at least 30 days prior to the date of bid opening. Bid opening is 
currently scheduled for March 30, 2005.

    Dated: October 8, 2004.
R.M. ``Johnnie'' Burton,
Director, Minerals Management Service.
[FR Doc. 04-23269 Filed 10-15-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P
Editorial Note on Part 142
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 142 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93019, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 142.3 Entry documentation required. ( a ) *Contents.* Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the entry documentation required to secure the release of merchandise must consist of the following: ( 1 ) *Entry.* CBP Form 3461 (appropriately modified), or its electronic equivalent, except that CBP Form 7533 (appropriately modified), or its electronic equivalent, in duplicate, may be used in place of CBP Form 3461 for merchandise imported from a contiguous country. The form used must be prepared in accordance with § 141.61(a)(1) of this chapter.
( 2 ) *Evidence of the right to make entry.* Evidence of the right to make entry, as set forth in § 141.11 of this chapter.
( 3 ) *Commercial invoice.* A commercial invoice, except that in those instances listed in § 141.83(d) of this chapter where a commercial invoice is not required, a pro forma invoice or other acceptable documentation listed in that section may be submitted in place of a commercial invoice.
( 4 ) *Packing list.* A packing list, where appropriate.
( 5 ) *Other documentation.* Other documents which may be required by CBP or other Federal, State, or local agencies for a particular shipment.
( 6 ) *Identification.* When merchandise is imported having been sold, or consigned, to a person in the United States, the name, street address, and appropriate identification number of that person, as provided in § 24.5 of this chapter, must be shown on the entry documents (CBP Form 3461, 3461 ALT, 7501), or their electronic equivalents. When, at the time of immediate delivery, entry or release, there is no known buyer, the name, street address, and appropriate identification number (as above) of the premises in the United States to which the merchandise is to be delivered must be shown on the entry or release documents.
( b ) *Entry summary filed at time of entry.* When the entry summary is filed at time of entry in accordance with § 142.12(a)(1) or § 142.13: ( 1 ) CBP Form 3461 or 7533, or their electronic equivalents, will not be required; and
( 2 ) CBP Form 7501 or CBP Form 3311, or their electronic equivalent, (as appropriate, *see* § 142.11) may serve as both the entry and the entry summary documentation if the additional documentation set forth in paragraphs (a)(2), (3), (4) and (5) of this section and § 142.16(b) is filed.
( c ) *Extra copies.* The CBP may require additional copies of the documentation.
( d ) *Electronic format.* The entry documentation identified in this section may be submitted to CBP in either a paper or, where appropriate, an electronic format.
(R.S. 251, as amended (19 U.S.C. 66), secs. 484, 624, 46 Stat. 722, as amended, 759 (19 U.S.C. 1484, 1624); sec. 301, 80 Stat. 379 (5 U.S.C. 301), Pub. L. 95-410 (Oct. 3, 1978); Pub. L. 96-511 (Dec. 11, 1980))
[T.D. 79-221, 44 FR 46821, Aug. 9, 1979, as amended by T.D. 84-129, 49 FR 23167, June 5, 1984; T.D. 90-92, 55 FR 49884, Dec. 3, 1990; CBP Dec. 09-47, 74 FR 69020, Dec. 30, 2009; CBP Dec. 15-14, 80 FR 61289, Oct. 13, 2015]
#### § 12.151 [Reserved]
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION I

475 Allendale Road

King of Prussia, PA 19406

No. I-00-72 October 20, 2000

CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610)337-5330/ e-mail: dps@nrc.gov

Neil A. Sheehan (610)337-5331/e-mail: nas@nrc.gov

NRC PROPOSES $8,800 FINE AGAINST TEMPLE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has cited Temple University Hospital for

discriminating against a technician who raised safety concerns. The NRC has proposed a civil penalty

of $8,800 against the Philadelphia medical facility.

An NRC investigation determined that Temple University Hospital management discriminated

against a nuclear medicine technologist in 1998. In November of that year, the technician informed

her supervisor of her intent to resign. However, she was subsequently not permitted to rescind her

resignation by Temple management, even though she was still employed by the hospital at the time and

had been told by her supervisor that the resignation could be rescinded.

Based on the findings of the NRC’s Office of Investigation and information provided by the

hospital during a predecisional enforcement conference on August 14, of this year, the NRC staff

determined the technician’s previous involvement in protected activities was at least part of the reason

she was not allowed to rescind her resignation.

NRC regulations prohibit a licensee from discriminating against any employee for engaging in

certain protected activities, such as providing a licensee with nuclear safety concerns or testifying at

any federal proceeding related to NRC requirements. Discrimination includes discharge and other

actions that relate to compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment.

In a letter forwarding the Notice of Violation, NRC Region I Administrator Hubert J. Miller

said he was issuing the proposed civil penalty to “emphasize the importance of continuously assuring a

work environment that is free of any harassment, intimidation, or discrimination against those who

raise safety concerns.”

Temple University Hospital has 30 days to pay the fine or to protest it. If the fine is protested

and subsequently imposed by the NRC staff, the company may request a hearing.

###
### §117l. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 117l was editorially reclassified as section 5544 of this title.
EXHIBIT 7

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 208-10 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2022 Page 1 of 2
http://cubancigarsculturelifestyle.blogspot.com/2013/01/, 

Case 1:20-cv-23287-DPG Document 208-10 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/09/2022 Page 2 of 2
Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-63 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 1
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19401

Phone: 610/337-5330 Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or rdh1@nrc.gov

I-96-63 September 16, 1996

Contact: Diane Screnci FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Roger Hannah

NRC STAFF ISSUES ORDER SUSPENDING LICENSE OF

GRD STEEL CORPORATION IN MONONGAHELA, PENNSYLVANIA

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued an order,

effective immediately, suspending the license of GRD Steel

Corporation of Monongahela, Pennsylvania. The order also

requires the company to transfer all NRC-licensed materials to an

authorized recipient.

NRC also has issued a demand for information to GRD,

requiring that it provide, within 20 days, information to assist

NRC in determining whether GRD's license should be revoked, or

whether the agency can have confidence that future activities

will be carried out in compliance with all NRC requirements.

GRD Steel, which manufactured carbon steel at its

Monongahela facility, holds an NRC licensee to possess and use

cobalt-60 in sealed sources for use in nuclear gauges.

NRC inspections and investigations have determined that the

Monongahela Industrial Development Association (MIDA) has

foreclosed on the mortgage it held on the GRD facility that

houses the gauges. As a result, MIDA now possesses licensed

material without an NRC license.

The order requires that GRD suspend all licensed activities

with the exception of transferring its two gauges to an

authorized recipient in cooperation with MIDA. The transfer must

take place within 60 days of receipt of the order.

GRD has 20 days to respond to the order, or to request a

hearing. Any such hearing request would not stay the immediate

effectiveness of the order.

#
Editorial Note on Part 141
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 141 appear by CBP Dec. No. 16-26, 81 FR 93019, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 141.15 Bond for production of bill of lading or air waybill. ( a ) *When appropriate.* If the person desiring to make entry is unable to present a bill of lading, air waybill, or other evidence of right to make entry in accordance with § 141.11, the port director may accept a bond for the production of a bill of lading or air waybill under the provisions of section 484(c), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1484(c)). The bond shall be for the production of a bill of lading or air waybill, unless the person making entry intends to produce a carrier's certificate or certified duplicate bill of lading or air waybill. In that case, no bond is required because section 484(c) does not apply to entries made on a carrier's certificate or certified duplicate bill of lading or air waybill. If the port director is in doubt as to the propriety of accepting entry on a bond for the production of a bill of lading or air waybill, he shall request authority to do so from the Commissioner of Customs.
( b ) *Form.* The bond shall be on Customs Form 301 and contain the bond conditions set forth in § 113.69 of this chapter.
( c ) *Documents acceptable to satisfy bond.* A bond given for the production of a bill of lading or air waybill shall be considered as canceled upon production of a bill of lading or air waybill, and may be considered as satisfied but shall not be canceled upon the production of a carrier's certificate or certified duplicate bill of lading or air waybill.
[T.D. 73-175, 38 FR 17447, July 2, 1973, as amended by T.D. 78-394, 43 FR 49788, Oct. 25, 1978; T.D. 84-213, 49 FR 41184, Oct. 19, 1984]
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined t hat t his opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limit ed circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4

. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED May 17, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 04-30731

_____________________ DAVID FRAZIER, etc.; ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,
LAKENDRA WILLIAMS, as natural tutrix, on behalf of Carisma Williams,
Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CITY OF BOSSIER; ET AL.,
Defendants,

CITY OF BOSSIER; LANCE KIRK ZANER, individually and as an employee of the City of Bossier,
Defendants - Appellants.

__________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:02-CV-698-SMH-RSP

_________________________________________________________________ Before JOLLY, SMITH and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

We have reviewed the record, carefully read the bri efs, and

have heard excellent arguments from both parties. While the
qualified immunity issue in this case is very close, we have
determined that the district court did not err in concluding that2

there are material issues of disputed fact that are best decided in

the course of a trial. W e therefore lack jurisdiction over this
interlocutory appeal. S ee Roberts v. City of Shreveport , 397 F.3d

287, 290 (5 th Cir. 2005). We also lack jurisdiction over the
interlocutory appeal of th e City of Bossier. S ee id

. at 291

. Accordingly this appeal is DISMISSED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-1361
IRVIN SEBREE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. R. DEAN KENDERDINE, Director, Maryland State Retirement Pension System, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson Everett Legg, Chief District Judge. (1:07-cv-01674-BEL) Submitted: July 31, 2008 Decided: September 26, 2008 Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Irvin Sebree, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Marshall Sullivan, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.1 The record indicates the Appellee’s last name is spelled “Kenderdine,” which is how we have spelled the name on the caption.

2 Sebree does not challenge the district court’s dismissal without prejudice of his state law claims. Accordingly, we will not review the court’s decision in this regard. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). - 2 - PER CURIAM: Irvin Sebree appeals the district court order granting the Appellee’s motion to dismiss and dismissing his civil rights case. We have reviewed the record and affirm for the reasons cited by the district court. Sebree v. Kenderine , No. 1:07-cv-01674-BEL (D. Md. Mar. 19, 2008). 1We affirm the district court order. 2 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 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and accompanies the quarterly
report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 (the Form 10-K) of
Dearborn Bancorp, Inc. (the Issuer). I, Jeffrey L. Karafa, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of the Issuer,
certify that:  (i)
    
    The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and(ii)
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Issuer. Dated: May 10, 2004 /s / Jeffrey L. Karafa
Jeffrey L. Karafa
Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer,
Dearborn Bancorp, Inc.
#### § 75.1 Purpose of part.

The purpose of this part is to establish standards with respect to the Federal Insurance Administrator's determinations that a State's plan of self-insurance is adequate and satisfactory for the purposes of exempting such State, under the provisions of section 102(c) of the Act, from the requirement of purchasing flood insurance coverage for State-owned structures and their contents in areas identified by the Federal Insurance Administrator as A, AO, AH, A1-30, AE, AR, AR/A1-30, AR/AE, AR/AO, AR/AH, AR/A, A99, M, V, VO, V1-30, VE, and E Zones, in which the sale of insurance has been made available, and to establish the procedures by which a State may request exemption under section 102(c).

[62 FR 55719, Oct. 27, 1997]
#### Andrew Fanuzzi, Appellant, v. Peter Churinskas, Respondent.

Action to recover damages for personal injuries. Judgment in favor of defendant, and resettled order denying plaintiff’s motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, reversed on the law and the facts, the motion granted and a new trial directed, with costs to abide the event. In the interests of justice there should be a new trial. Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

                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 on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended
March 31, 2004, of Synagro Technologies, Inc. (the "Company"), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert
C. Boucher, Jr., certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company and that the Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

                                                 /s/ Robert C. Boucher, Jr.
                                                 -------------------------------
                                                 Robert C. Boucher, Jr.
                                                 October 20, 2004
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS 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 Jarden Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Martin E. Franklin, Chairman and Chief Executive 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:

(1) The 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 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.



|                                    
|------------------------------------
|/s/ Martin E. Franklin              
|Martin E. Franklin                  
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|July 31, 2008                       

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jarden Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ian G.H. Ashken, Vice Chairman and 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:

(1) The 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 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.



|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|/s/ Ian G.H. Ashken                      
|Ian G.H. Ashken                          
|Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer
|July 31, 2008
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.36a Vehicles, pleasure boats and aircraft brought in for repair or alteration. ( a ) A vehicle (such as an automobile, truck, bus, motorcycle, tractor, trailer), pleasure boat, or aircraft brought into the United States by an operator of such vehicle, pleasure boat, or aircraft for repair or alteration (as defined in §§ 10.8, 10.490, 10.570, and 181.64 of this chapter) may be entered on the operator's baggage declaration, in lieu of formal entry and examination, and may be passed under subheading 9813.00.05, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), at the place of arrival in the same manner as passengers' baggage. When the vehicle, aircraft, or pleasure boat to be entered is being towed by or transported on another vehicle, the operator of the towing or transporting vehicle may make entry for the vehicle, aircraft or pleasure boat to be repaired or altered. The bond, prescribed by § 10.31(f), filed to support entry under this section shall be without surety or cash deposit except as provided by this paragraph and paragraph (d) of this section. The examination may be made by an inspector who is qualified to determine the amount of such bond to be filed in support of the entry. The privilege accorded by this paragraph shall not apply when two or more vehicles, pleasure boats, or aircraft are to be entered by the same importer under subheading 9813.00.05, HTSUS, at the same time. In that event, the importer must file a formal entry supported by bond with surety or cash deposit in lieu of surety.
( b ) Each vehicle, pleasure boat, or aircraft to which paragraph (a) of this section is applicable shall be identified on the operator's baggage declaration, which must include the data prescribed in paragraphs (a) and (e) of § 10.31.
( c ) Exportation shall be effected in accordance with the provisions of § 10.38.
( d ) The privilege of clearance of a vehicle, pleasure boat, or aircraft brought in by the operator of such vehicle, pleasure boat, or aircraft, for repair or alteration on his baggage declaration under bond without surety or cash deposit shall not be granted to an individual who has failed to comply with the provisions of such a bond in connection with any prior arrival. Such individual shall be required to file a formal entry under subheading 9813.00.05, HTSUS, with a bond supported by a surety or cash deposit in lieu of surety.
[T.D. 66-39, 31 FR 2817, Feb. 17, 1966, as amended by T.D. 84-213, 49 FR 41165, Oct. 19, 1984; T.D. 89-1, 53 FR 51248, Dec. 21, 1988; T.D. 94-1, 58 FR 69470, Dec. 30, 1993; CBP Dec. 05-07, 70 FR 10872, Mar. 7, 2005; CBP Dec. 07-28, 72 FR 31995, June 11, 2007]