alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1979. Release of security information

#### (a) Definition

In this section, the term "security information" means information that—

(1) is sensitive with respect to the policing, protection, physical security, intelligence, counterterrorism actions, or emergency preparedness and response relating to Congress, any statutory protectee of the Capitol Police, and the Capitol buildings and grounds; and

(2) is obtained by, on behalf of, or concerning the Capitol Police Board, the Capitol Police, or any incident command relating to emergency response.

#### (b) Authority of Board to determine conditions of release

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any security information in the possession of the Capitol Police may be released by the Capitol Police to another entity, including an individual, only if the Capitol Police Board determines in consultation with other appropriate law enforcement officials, experts in security preparedness, and appropriate committees of Congress, that the release of the security information will not compromise the security and safety of the Capitol buildings and grounds or any individual whose protection and safety is under the jurisdiction of the Capitol Police.

#### (c) Rule of construction

Nothing in this section may be construed to affect the ability of the Senate and the House of Representatives (including any Member, officer, or committee of either House of Congress) to obtain information from the Capitol Police regarding the operations and activities of the Capitol Police that affect the Senate and House of Representatives.

#### (d) Regulations

The Capitol Police Board may promulgate regulations to carry out this section, with the approval of the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate and the Committee on House Administration of the House of Representatives.

#### (e) Effective date

This section shall take effect on December 8, 2004, and apply with respect to—

(1) any remaining portion of fiscal year 2004, if this Act is enacted before October 1, 2004; and

(2) fiscal year 2005 and each fiscal year thereafter.

(Pub. L. 108–447, div. G, title I, §1009, Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3182.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in subsec. (e)(1), is div. G of Pub. L. 108–447, Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3166, known as the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2005, which was enacted Dec. 8, 2004.

#### Codification

Section is from the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2005, which is div. G of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005.
bicx_ex43.htm

EXHIBIT 4.3
  
 DESCRIPTION OF REGISTRANT’S SECURITIES
 REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE
 SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
  
 Set forth below is the description of the common stock, par value $0.001 per share (the “Common Stock”) of BioCorRx Inc. (“we” or “our”). The following description summarizes the most important terms of these securities. This summary does not purport to be complete and is qualified in its entirety by the provisions of our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation, as amended (the “Articles”), and our Amended and Restated Bylaws, copies of which have been previously filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and are incorporated by reference into the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2020. You should refer to our Articles, Bylaws and the applicable provisions of the Nevada Revised Statutes, Chapter 78 (the “Nevada Code”), for a complete description.
  
 The Common Stock is the only class of our securities currently registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Our Common Stock is quoted on the OTCQB under the symbol “BICX.”
  
 Authorized Common Stock
  
 Our authorized Common Stock consists of 750,000,000 shares.
  
 Dividend Rights
  
 Subject to preferences that may apply to any shares of preferred stock outstanding at the time, the holders of our Common Stock are entitled to receive dividends out of funds legally available if our Board of Directors, in its discretion, determines to declare and pay dividends and then only at the times and in the amounts that our Board of Directors may determine.
  
 Voting Rights
  
 Holders of our Common Stock are entitled to one vote for each share held on all matters properly submitted to a vote of stockholders on which holders of Common Stock are entitled to vote. We have not provided for cumulative voting for the election of directors in our Articles. The directors are elected by a plurality of the outstanding shares entitled to vote on the election of directors. On all other matters the affirmative vote of a majority of the voting power of the shares present or represented by proxy at the meeting and entitled to vote on the subject matter constitutes the act of the stockholders, except as otherwise expressly provided by the Nevada Code.
  
 No Preemptive or Similar Rights
  
 Our Common Stock is not entitled to preemptive rights, and is not subject to conversion, redemption or sinking fund provisions.
  
 Right to Receive Liquidation Distributions
  
 If we become subject to a liquidation, dissolution or winding-up, the assets legally available for distribution to our stockholders would be distributable ratably among the holders of our Common Stock and any participating preferred stock outstanding at that time, subject to prior satisfaction of all outstanding debt and liabilities and the preferential rights of and the payment of liquidation preferences, if any, on any outstanding shares of preferred stock.
    
 Transfer Agent and Registrar
  
 VStock Transfer LLC is the transfer agent and registrar with respect to the Common Stock.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 61252]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-23131]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than November 8, 2004.
    Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (Jacqueline G. Nicholas, 
Community Affairs Officer) 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 
55480-0291:
    DCNB Holding Company, Clear Lake, South Dakota; to become a bank 
holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Deuel 
County National Bank, Clear Lake, South Dakota.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 8, 
2004.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 04-23131 Filed 10-14-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
Date: February 19, 2015

To: Docket, EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0738

From: Andrew Bouchard

Subject: Meeting Record for February 19, 2015 Meeting Between the U.S. EPA and The 

Dow Chemical Company

On February 19, 2015, representatives of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) participated in a conference call with The Dow Chemical Company. The purpose of the 

call was to discuss the initial MPGF AMEL notice and process for submitting comments to the 

docket. See Attachment 1 for the names and affiliations of the meeting participants.
Attachment 1

Participants in February 19, 2015 EPA/Dow Meeting

The Dow Chemical Company Representatives

Russell Wozniak

Jarod Davis

Vance Varner

U.S. EPA Representatives

Andrew Bouchard

Brenda Shine

Susan Stahle
#### § 115.54 Renewal of certificate.

A certificate of approval may be renewed if the Certifying Authority determines by inspection every 2 years that the vehicle continues to comply with the applicable requirements in § 115.51.
HomeAbout NRCHow We RegulateEnforcementIssued Significant Enforcement Actions

# 2021 Individual Actions

This information is unavailable at this time.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, November 1, 2023

Section Navigation

#### Navigation

          - 2024 Reactor Actions
          - 2023 Reactor Actions
          - 2022 Reactor Actions
          - 2021 Reactor Actions
          - 2020 Reactor Actions
          - 2024 Materials Actions
          - 2023 Materials Actions
          - 2022 Materials Actions
          - 2021 Materials Actions
          - 2020 Materials Actions
          - 2024 Individual Actions
          - 2023 Individual Actions
          - 2022 Individual Actions
          - 2021 Individual Actions
          - 2020 Individual Actions
          - 2020 Non-Licensee Actions
          - 2019 Non-Licensee Actions
          - 2016 Non-Licensee Actions
          - 2015 Non-Licensee Actions
          - 2014 Non-Licensee Actions
          - 2023 Fuel Cycle Facilities
          - 2019 Fuel Cycle Facilities
          - 2018 Fuel Cycle Facilities
          - 2017 Fuel Cycle Facilities
          - 2016 Fuel Cycle Facilities

#### Spotlight

#### Choose a Section

                - The Commission
                - License Renewal Generic Environmental Review
                - Job Openings
                - Palisades Restart
                - Environmental Justice 
                - Pilgrim Water Releases
                - Monticello Tritium Issue
                - International Strategy 2021-2025
                - Tribal Liaison Program
                - MAP-X
                - Transformation at the NRC - Updated
                - OIG Hotline
                - Rulemaking Activity
                - Commission Documents
                - Advanced Reactors
                - Nuclear Security
                - Strategic Plan

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Wednesday, November 1, 2023
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 99-24 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Tuesday, February 9, 1999)

NRC TO HOLD INFORMAL PUBLIC HEARING ON PETITIONS

CONCERNING RIVER BEND , PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold an informal public hearing February

22 in Rockville, Maryland, on two petitions asking that the NRC immediately shut down the

River Bend Station and Perry Nuclear Power Plant and that it suspend or modify their

operating licenses. River Bend Station is located in St. Francisville, Louisiana. The Perry

Nuclear Power Plant is located in Perry, Ohio.

The hearing will begin at 1:00 p.m. in Room T-2B3 at NRC Headquarters at the Two

White Flint North building, 11545 Rockville Pike. The NRC also has arranged for members of

the public, who are unable to attend the hearing in Rockville, to participate via video

teleconferencing at meeting facilities located in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and Cleveland, Ohio.

The remote sites are (1) Center For Instructional Telecommunications, Room 202, Coates Hall,

Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana and (2) The Forum Conference and

Education Center, Inc., One Cleveland Center Office Building, 1375 East 9th Street, Cleveland,

Ohio.

The hearing will be held in response to petitions filed by the Union of Concerned

Scientists last fall that raise concerns about pinhole leaks in the metal cladding surrounding

uranium fuel in the plants’ reactor cores. The fuel cladding is one of three primary barriers

protecting the public from exposure to radiation while the plants are operating.

In addition to calling for an immediate shutdown, the petitions call for suspension or

modification of plant operating licenses until River Bend and Perry’s design and licensing

documents are updated to permit operation with failed fuel assemblies - or until all failed fuel

assemblies are removed from the reactor. The NRC staff has already determined that the

leaks pose no immediate safety concern.

The hearing is intended to give the petitioner, the licensees (Entergy Operations,

Incorporated and FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company), and the public an opportunity to

provide additional information which will subsequently be used by the NRC staff to evaluate the

petition. Members of the public who are interested in making presentations should contact

Robert J. Fretz of the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation at (301) 415-1324.

##
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 98-15 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Wednesday, January 28, 1998)

NRC STAFF SCHEDULES TWO-DAY CONFERENCE

TO DISCUSS REGULATORY ISSUES WITH NUCLEAR INDUSTRY

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will hold its tenth annual Regulatory

Information Conference, April 14 and 15, at the Capital Hilton Hotel, 16th and K Streets, NW,

Washington, DC.

The conference will focus on enhancing and developing a better understanding of future

trends for improved nuclear safety. The conference will be open to the public, but advance

registration is suggested.

Samuel J. Collins, Director of the NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, will open

the conference on Tuesday, April 14. Chairman Shirley Ann Jackson will be the featured

morning speaker. Commissioner Nils J. Diaz also will address the group in the morning,

followed by a plenary session on regional administrator panel Issues.

The Tuesday post-luncheon speaker will be Commissioner Greta J. Dicus. Tuesday

afternoon will feature eight breakout sessions, beginning with four at 2:30 p.m. on restructuring

and deregulation, enforcement Issues, architect engineer inspections, and public

communications initiatives. Beginning at 3:45 p.m., sessions will be held on

allegations/employee concerns, probabilistic risk assessment issues, the role of industry, and

recent issues concerning emergency preparedness and response. The afternoon speaker

(5:00pm - 5:30 pm) will be determined at a later date.

On Wednesday, April 15, the morning speaker will be Commissioner Edward

McGaffigan, Jr. From 9:05 until 10:15 a.m., the four NRC Regional Administrators will conduct

separate breakout sessions concerning NRC/licensee communications. Four subsequent

breakout sessions, will discuss NRC regulations for changes, tests and experiments (10 CFR

50.59), strategic planning/operating plan/budget impacts on industry, results of AEOD analysis

of operating experience, and licensing actions/technical specification conversions.

The Wednesday, April 15, post-luncheon speaker will be determined at a later date.

Afternoon breakout sessions from 2:45 pm to 4pm will address improvements to NRC’s

performance assessment process, license renewal, spent fuel storage/dry cask issues, and

core performance/fuels issues. The closing plenary session will be held from 4:15 pm to 4:45

pm, followed by a conference feedback session.

For information on registration for the conference, interested persons should contact

ES, Inc., by telephone at (202) 835-1585 or by FAX at (202) 835-0118.
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 19

- 00638

- CV
In re Fraudulent Hospital Lien Litigation

On Appeal from the 444th District Court of Cameron County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. MDL

- 15

- 0360

- H

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes the appeal should be dismissed

. The Court orders the appeal DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion

. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant. We further order this decision certified below for observance. March 5, 2020
### §475. Periodic district court assessment

After developing or selecting a civil justice expense and delay reduction plan, each United States district court shall assess annually the condition of the court's civil and criminal dockets with a view to determining appropriate additional actions that may be taken by the court to reduce cost and delay in civil litigation and to improve the litigation management practices of the court. In performing such assessment, the court shall consult with an advisory group appointed in accordance with section 478 of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 101–650, title I, §103(a), Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5093.)
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Sergio ALANIS-GONZALES, also known as Adrian Mungia, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 04-40531.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 24, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Timothy William Crooks, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Paul G. Hajjar, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for D efendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public Defender, appointed to represent Sergio Alanis-Gonzales (Alan-is) on appeal has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Alanis has not responded to counsel’s motion.

Our independent review of the brief, the supplemental letter brief, and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue in this appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
### §123b. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 123b was editorially reclassified as section 4131 of this title.
###### Editorial Note on Part 10

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 10.79 [Reserved]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6751

OSVALDO RIVERA RODRIGUEZ,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

ROBERT HUDGINS, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at 

Wheeling. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (5:20-cv-00128-JPB)

Submitted: July 20, 2022 Decided: July 21, 2022

Before AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Osvaldo Rivera Rodriguez, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 21-6751 Doc: 10 Filed: 07/21/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Osvaldo Rivera Rodriguez, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice 

Rodriguez’s 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he challenged the conditions of his 

confinement. Rodriguez contended that he is incorrectly assigned to a higher security 

correctional facility as the result of a miscalculation in his custody level. The district court 

held that the claim Rodriguez sought to raise was not cognizable under § 2241. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s 

order. Rodriguez v. Hudgins, No. 5:20-cv-00128-JPB (N.D.W. Va. Apr. 21, 2021). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 21-6751 Doc: 10 Filed: 07/21/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7479

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

PRESTON WEST,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR97-175)

Submitted: January 30, 2003 Decided: February 5, 2003

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Preston West, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Reeves Harding, Assistant

United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Preston West appeals the district court’s order denying his

Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of an order

dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the

reasons stated by the district court. See United States v. West,

No. CR-97-175 (D. Md. July 29, 2002). 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
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Oneta M. Gomez, Respondent, against Bethlehem Steel Company, Appellant. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Present — Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Deyo and Santry, JJ. [See 274 App. Div. 1082.]
§ 111.51 Cancellation of license or permit. ( a ) *Without prejudice.* The appropriate Executive Director, Office of Trade, may cancel a broker's license or permit “without prejudice” upon written application by the broker if the appropriate Executive Director, Office of Trade, determines that the application for cancellation was not made in order to avoid proceedings for the suspension or revocation of the license or permit. If the appropriate Executive Director, Office of Trade, determines that the application for cancellation was made in order to avoid those proceedings, he or she may cancel the license or permit “without prejudice” only with authorization from the Executive Assistant Commissioner.
( b ) *With prejudice.* The appropriate Executive Director, Office of Trade may cancel a broker's license or permit “with prejudice” when specifically requested to do so by the broker. The effect of a cancellation “with prejudice” is in all respects the same as if the license or permit had been revoked for cause by the Executive Assistant Commissioner except that it will not give rise to a right of appeal.
[T.D. 00-17, 65 FR 13891, Mar. 15, 2000, as amended by CBP Dec. 22-21, 87 FR 63319, Oct. 18, 2022]
#### § 112.44 Changes in information on identification cards.

Where there has been a change in the name, address, or employer of the holder, the card shall be promptly submitted by the cardholder to the port director, supported by application in proper form indicating the change so that it may be officially changed on the Customs records. New cards shall be issued when necessary.