alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6797

AARON HOLSEY, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus HORNBECKER, individually and as Facility Administrator; CHARNEY CAIN, individually and as Supervisor of Classification Department; HILL, individually and as a Classification Counselor; RICHARD LANHAM, individually and as Commissioner of the Division of Corrections; EARL BESHEARS, individually and as Warden; GEORGE KALAROUMAKIS, individually and asFacility Administrator; DIRECTOR OF CLASSIFICATION, individually also (Name Unknown) at Department of Corrections Headquarters, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge. (CA-97-2422-JFM) Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 2, 1998 Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 Aaron Holsey, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr., AttorneyGeneral, Wendy Ann Kronmiller, Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:Aaron Holsey appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1998) complaint and denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Holsey v. Hornbecker , No. CA-97-2422-JFM (D. Md. Apr. 16 and May 7, 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.

AFFIRMED
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 760 

To require recipients of Federal funds to disclose information relating to 

programs, projects, or activities carried out using the Federal funds. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 16, 2021 

Ms. ERNST (for herself, Mr. SCOTT of Florida, Mr. PAUL, and Mr. BRAUN) 

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To require recipients of Federal funds to disclose information 

relating to programs, projects, or activities carried out 

using the Federal funds. 

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 ‘‘Cost Openness and 

5 Spending Transparency Act of 2021’’ or the ‘‘COST Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 760 IS

1 SEC. 2. DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS FOR RECIPIENTS OF 

2 FEDERAL FUNDS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter III of chapter 13 of 

4 title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

5 end the following: 

6 ‘‘§ 1356. Disclosure requirements for recipients of 

7 Federal funds 

8 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—An individual or entity (includ9 ing a State or local government and a recipient of a Fed10 eral research grant) carrying out a program, project, or 

11 activity that is, in whole or in part, carried out using Fed12 eral funds shall clearly state in any statement, press re13 lease, request for proposals, bid solicitation, or other docu14 ment describing the program, project, or activity, other 

15 than a communication containing not more than 280 char16 acters— 

17 ‘‘(1) the percentage of the total costs of the 

18 program, project, or activity which will be financed 

19 with Federal funds; 

20 ‘‘(2) the dollar amount of the Federal funds 

21 made available for the program, project, or activity; 

22 and 

23 ‘‘(3) the percentage of the total costs of, and 

24 dollar amount for, the program, project, or activity 

25 that will be financed by nongovernmental sources. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 760 IS

1 ‘‘(b) NONCOMPLIANCE.—If the Director of the Office 

2 of Management and Budget determines that an individual 

3 or entity is failing to comply with subsection (a), the Di4 rector may direct the head of each agency providing Fed5 eral funds to the individual or entity to withhold not more 

6 than 25 percent of the amount of Federal funds that 

7 would otherwise be provided to the individual or entity, 

8 until the date on which the individual or entity complies 

9 with subsection (a).’’. 

10 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— 

11 The table of sections for subchapter III of chapter 13 of 

12 title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

13 end the following: 

‘‘1356. Disclosure requirements for recipients of Federal funds.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1505 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 1505

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 1, 2003

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
 at 2127 Beatties Ford Road in Charlotte, North Carolina, as the ``Jim 
                       Richardson Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2127 
Beatties Ford Road in Charlotte, North Carolina, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Jim Richardson Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Jim Richardson Post 
Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 31, 2003.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### Martin G. Ruth, Sr., Respondent-Appellant, v. Mortimer A. Cronin et al., Appellants, and Jay B. Wicks, Respondent.

Present — Taylor, P. J., MeCurn, Love, Vaughan and Piper, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                             234
<SECURITIES>                                       500
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,749
<ALLOWANCES>                                       212
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,313
<PP&E>                                           1,861
<DEPRECIATION>                                     384
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  38,963
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,019
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            94
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,894)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    38,963
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,944
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,842
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (6,827)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   190
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,627
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,098)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,098)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,098)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.39)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT OF
PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER 
AND OF
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER 
OF



ENERGY EAST CORPORATION



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



We, Wesley W. von Schack, Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer, and Robert D. Kump, Vice President, Controller & Chief Accounting Officer, of Energy East Corporation, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) Energy East Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 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 Energy East Corporation.

|Date: February 29, 2008 | /s/Wesley W. von Schack        Wesley W. von Schack
        Chairman, President & 
        Chief Executive Officer
|----------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                        | /s/Robert D. Kump        Robert D. Kump
        Senior Vice President and 
        Chief Financial Officer
RC Aerial Platforms, LLC 

225 Crossroads Blvd. STE 328 

Carmel, CA 93923 

831.291.3971 

www.rcaerialplatforms.com 

December 28, 2015 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington. DC 20590 

Re. Petition to Amend FAA Exemption No. 13566 (the "Exemption") 

Dear Sir or Madam: 

RC Aerial Platforms. LLC, hereby requests approval to amend the Exemption to permit RCAP to 

operate an additional model of UAS —the DJI Phantom 3 Professional (N214AP). The FAA has 

previously authorized use of the DJI Phantom 3 Professional for commercial purposes on 

multiple occasions (e.g.. Exemption Nos. 13022, 11822, 11481). 

On November 6. 2015. the FAA issued the Exemption to RCAP to utilize the DJI Inspire 1, RC 

Timer S-1100 Pro, and RC Timer Trooper Y6 UAS for aerial data collection. 

AII UAS operations will continue to fully adhere to the conditions of the Exemption and all 

operations will be in full compliance with the terms of the Exemption. 

Thank you for your consideration of our request. 

If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at 831.291.3971. 

Sincerely yours, 

Andrew St Laurent 

CEO 

RC Aerial Platforms. LLC
### §6592. Limitation on compensation of Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of Senate

The Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate shall receive, directly or indirectly, no fees or other compensation or emolument whatever for performing the duties of the office, or in connection therewith, other than the salary prescribed by law.

(June 20, 1874, ch. 328, 18 Stat. 85.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 62 of this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

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

#### Similar Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were also contained in act Mar. 3, 1875, ch. 129, 18 Stat. 344.
Flying high on conservation

Look at 

the green hills

And the

creeks and animals

The NRCS is a branch of the USDA that

assists people in making wise decisions

on farms, ranches, and other private land.

Together the conservationists and

landowners plan ways to protect the

soil, water, air, plants and animals.

Colored by:________________________

Date:__________________

Event:________________________
A conservation conversation

The NRCS is a branch of the USDA that

assists people in making wise decisions

on farms, ranches, and other private land.

Together the conservationists and

landowners plan ways to protect the

soil, water, air, plants and animals.

Now

our farm is green

and our water is clean.

Come visit us! 

Colored by:________________________

Date:__________________

Event:________________________
Conservation matters to all of us

The NRCS is a branch of the USDA that

assists people in making wise decisions

on farms, ranches, and other private land.

Together the conservationists and

landowners plan ways to protect the

soil, water, air, plants and animals.

Colored by:________________________

Date:__________________

Event:________________________
AGRICULTURE

ANIMALS

BACKYARD

BEE

BUSH

BUTTERFLY

CALIFORNIA

COMPOST

CONSERVATION

CROPS

EROSION

FARM

FLOWER

GARDEN

GRASS

HABITAT

IRRIGATION

LADYBUG

MULCH

NATIVE

NATURE

NUTRIENTS

POND

PRESERVE

RECYCLE

SEEDS

SOIL

TREE

TURTLE

WATER

WETLAND

NASMULCHTHDEYBXNPI

EURMHBUTTERFLYULUR

WATCCVKGFSAQPBASZR

FSDROFLCLADYBUGIHI

OUJWINYROWNTISRLAG

XCVEKESOWMPNATIVEA

TMATRENEESPEJOCLMT

EWCLLOETROEOSBUGHI

HTKAIESASVHJSKLISO

LAONBFPIRCAVETTYAN

BGBDNFOEOMATEDURZR

IAQIHTSRGNMLIPRYET

GRCUTEUONJHSGOENBE

TDRKRABRAIWOWRNEUL

PEOPYLTGTVANIMALSA

ONPIXACVULTKLMGSRT

SDSTYIRERLENSEEDSG

RECYCLEDEAREJFPOND

CONSERVATION

WORD SEARCH

HOW MANY

CAN YOU FIND?

The NRCS is a branch of the USDA that

assists people in making wise decisions

on farms, ranches, and other private land.

Together the conservationists and

landowners plan ways to protect the

soil, water, air, plants and animals.

Solved by:________________________

Date:__________________

Event:________________________
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RAYMOND HARRY MILEY,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 897 MAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 13th day of December, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is DENIED

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
FOR QUARTER ENDED JUNE 27, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-26-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-29-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-27-1999
<CASH>                                             379
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,371
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,016
<INVENTORY>                                      5,531
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,229
<PP&E>                                           7,348
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,437
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,255
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,789
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            39
<OTHER-SE>                                       9,427
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,255
<SALES>                                          4,717
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 4,717
<CGS>                                            2,813
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,470
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  15
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (551)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (551)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (551)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.14)


</TABLE>
#### Denis J. Murphy, an Infant, by Denis Murphy, His Guardian ad Litem, Appellant, v. Yonkers Savings Bank and Mary Higgins Duffy, as Administratrix, etc., of Thomas Frain, Deceased, Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Ho opinion. ‘Jenks, P. J., Burr, Rich, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
### §3732. False claims jurisdiction

(a) Actions Under Section 3730.—Any action under section 3730 may be brought in any judicial district in which the defendant or, in the case of multiple defendants, any one defendant can be found, resides, transacts business, or in which any act proscribed by section 3729 occurred. A summons as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure shall be issued by the appropriate district court and served at any place within or outside the United States.

(b) Claims Under State Law.—The district courts shall have jurisdiction over any action brought under the laws of any State for the recovery of funds paid by a State or local government if the action arises from the same transaction or occurrence as an action brought under section 3730.

(c) Service on State or Local Authorities.—With respect to any State or local government that is named as a co-plaintiff with the United States in an action brought under subsection (b), a seal on the action ordered by the court under section 3730(b) shall not preclude the Government or the person bringing the action from serving the complaint, any other pleadings, or the written disclosure of substantially all material evidence and information possessed by the person bringing the action on the law enforcement authorities that are authorized under the law of that State or local government to investigate and prosecute such actions on behalf of such governments, except that such seal applies to the law enforcement authorities so served to the same extent as the seal applies to other parties in the action.

(Added Pub. L. 99–562, §6(a), Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 3158; amended Pub. L. 111–21, §4(e), May 20, 2009, 123 Stat. 1625.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (a), are set out in the Appendix to Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.

#### Amendments

2009—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 111–21 added subsec. (c).

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

#### Effective Date of 2009 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–21 effective May 20, 2009, and applicable to conduct on or after May 20, 2009, except that this section, as amended by Pub. L. 111–21, applicable to cases pending on May 20, 2009, see section 4(f) of Pub. L. 111–21, set out as a note under section 3729 of this title.
EXHIBIT 13.2

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 filing of the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended November 27, 2004 (the "Report") by Novamerican
Steel Inc. (the "Company"), the undersigned, as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | /s/Christopher H. PickwoadName: Christopher H. Pickwoad
Title: Chief Financial Officer
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle IL 60532

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

No. III-04-013 March 19, 2004

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 

Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

NRC PROPOSES $60,000 FINE AGAINST POINT BEACH NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has proposed a $60,000 fine against Nuclear Management

Company for making changes without NRC approval to the emergency plan at the Point Beach Nuclear

Plant that decreased its effectiveness. The plant is located near Two Rivers, Wisconsin.

Between July 28 and December 16, 2003, the NRC conducted a special inspection to review the

utility’s corrective actions for two findings of high safety significance in the auxiliary feedwater

system. The inspection involved a comprehensive review of principal aspects of plant operations,

including a review of the plant’s emergency preparedness.

NRC inspectors found that between October 1998 and December 1999, changes had been made

to the emergency action level (EAL) scheme that reduced the effectiveness of Point Beach’s

emergency plan without requesting and obtaining NRC approval. These changes also resulted in use of

a non-standard emergency level scheme, which is used to properly identify the level of emergency at a

nuclear power plant and to determine the appropriate actions that must be taken in response to the

emergency.

“The failure to receive NRC approval before changing EALs that decrease the effectiveness of

the Emergency Plan is a significant safety issue. The failure to submit the changes and receive NRC

approval prevents the NRC from performing its regulatory function and potentially prevents the NRC

from ensuring the health and safety of the public,” writes James L. Caldwell, regional administrator for

NRC’s Region III in Lisle, Illinois, in his March 17 letter to the Nuclear Management Company.

During a predecisional enforcement conference conducted on January 13 of this year, between

the NRC and Nuclear Management Company, to discuss the apparent violation, its significance, root

causes and the company’s corrective actions, it became apparent that the utility had failed to take

appropriate immediate correction action to restore the emergency plan to compliance.

Subsequently, Nuclear Management Company has taken appropriate action to restore the

emergency plan to compliance and has initiated a review of emergency plans at other nuclear power

plants operated by the company and to correct problems as they are found.

The company has until April 16 to pay the fine or to protest it. If the fine is protested and

subsequently imposed by the NRC staff, Nuclear Management Company can request a hearing.
The notice to the company of the proposed fine and the notice of violation are available from

the Region III Office of Public Affairs and on the NRC’s web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/enforcement/actions/reactors/p.html#PointBeach.

# # #
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200

 Washington, DC 20555-001 E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. 04-073 June 14, 2004

NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE

TO MEET JUNE 22-24 IN ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste will meet June

22-24 in Rockville, Md., to hear presentations and hold discussions with NRC staff, the Department of

Energy, and the U.S. Geological Survey concerning the scientific methods used to predict the behavior

of radioactive material in the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev. It will also

hold discussions with the DOE related to the NRC’s review of the technical documents intended to

support the future Yucca Mountain license application.

The meeting will be held in Room T-2B3 of the agency’s Two White Flint North Building, at

11545 Rockville Pike. The meeting will begin at 10:00 a.m. on June 22, at 9:00 a.m. on June 23 and at

8:30 a.m. on June 24.

A complete agenda will be available on the NRC’s Web site at this address:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/acnw/agenda/2004/ . For additional information or

schedule changes, please contact Howard Larson at 301-415-6805.

###