alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1207. Regulations

#### (a) Operating and technical conditions and characteristics; frequencies, emission, and power of radiotelephone equipment

The Federal Communications Commission shall, after consultation with other cognizant agencies, prescribe regulations necessary to specify operating and technical conditions and characteristics including frequencies, emission, and power of radiotelephone equipment required under this chapter.

#### (b) Enforcement

The Secretary shall, subject to the concurrence of the Federal Communications Commission, prescribe regulations for the enforcement of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 92–63, §8, Aug. 4, 1971, 85 Stat. 165.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective May 1, 1971, or six months after the promulgation of regulations which would implement its provisions, whichever is later, see section 10 of Pub. L. 92–63, set out as a note under section 1201 of this title.
§ 2610.307 Further proceedings. ( a ) Ordinarily, the determination of an award will be made on the basis of the written record. However, on request of either the applicant or agency counsel, or on his or her own initiative, the adjudicative officer may order further proceedings, such as an informal conference, oral argument, additional written submissions or, as to issues other than substantial justification (such as the applicant's eligibility or substantiation of fees and expenses), pertinent discovery or an evidentiary hearing. Such further proceedings shall be held only when necessary for full and fair resolution of the issues arising from the application, and shall be conducted as promptly as possible. Whether or not the position of the Office was substantially justified shall be determined on the basis of the administrative record, as a whole, which is made in the adversary adjudication for which fees and other expenses are sought.
( b ) A request that the adjudicative officer order further proceedings under this section shall specifically identify the information sought or the disputed issues and shall explain why the additional proceedings are necessary to resolve the issues.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 99-4500

THOMAS H. LIGON,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk.

Jerome B. Friedman, District Judge.

(CR-97-131)

Submitted: March 28, 2000

Decided: April 17, 2000

Before WILLIAMS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges,

and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Paul A. Driscoll, PENDER & COWARD, P.C., Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellant. Mark A. Exley, Assistant United States Attorney,

Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Thomas H. Ligon pled guilty to embezzling union funds in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 501(c) (1994). The district court sentenced Ligon

to a ten-month term of imprisonment to be followed by three years

of supervised release and ordered restitution in the amount of

$16,000. We affirmed Ligon's conviction, dismissed the appeal of his

prison sentence, vacated the district court's restitution order, and

remanded for the court to make explicit findings with regard to

Ligon's ability to pay the amount of restitution ordered. See United

States v. Ligon, No. 98-4230 (4th Cir. Dec. 15, 1998) (unpublished).

On remand, the district court considered Ligon's ability to pay and

ordered Ligon to pay restitution in the amount of $5050. Ligon

appeals, contending that the district court abused its discretion in

ordering him to pay $5050, given his financial resources. We have

reviewed the briefs, the joint appendices, and the district court's order

imposing $5050 in restitution and find no abuse of discretion.*

See United States v. Blake, 81 F.3d 498, 505 (4th Cir. 1996) (stating

standard of review). We therefore affirm the district court's resentencing order.

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

_________________________________________________________________

*The government argues on appeal that the law-of-the-case doctrine

should not preclude us from revisiting our prior decision. Because we

find that there was no manifest injustice in this case, the government has

not established an exception to the law-of-the-case doctrine. See United

States v. Aramony, 166 F.3d 655, 661 (4th Cir.) (discussing doctrine and

exceptions), cert. denied, 119 S. Ct. 2022 (1999); United States v.

Becerra, 155 F.3d 740, 754-56 (5th Cir. 1998) (rejecting government's

attempt to show manifest injustice where government for first time on

appeal after remand introduced new evidence that it had opportunity to

present to prior panel).

 2
#### § 1620.41 Definitions.

As used in this subpart:

*Current contributions* means contributions that must be made for the current pay date which is reported on the journal voucher that accompanies the payroll submission.

*Nonpay status* means an employer-approved temporary absence from duty.

*Reemployed or returned to pay status* means reemployed in or returned to a pay status, pursuant to 38 U.S.C. chapter 43, to a position that is subject to 5 U.S.C. 8351 or chapter 84.

*Retroactive period* means the period for which an employee can make up missed employee contributions and receive missed agency contributions. It begins the day after the employee separates or enters nonpay status to perform military service and ends when the employee is reemployed or returned to pay status.

*Separate from civilian service* means to cease employment with the Federal Government, the U.S. Postal Service, or with any other employer from a position that is deemed to be civilian Government employment for purposes of participating in the TSP, for 31 or more full calendar days.

[67 FR 49525, July 30, 2002]
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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned certifies that this periodic
report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,  and that information  contained in
this periodic report fairly presents,  in all material  respects,  the financial
condition and results of operations of Ridgewood Electric Power Trust II.

Date:  December 10, 2004      /s/ Robert E. Swanson
                             --------------------------------
                             Robert E. Swanson
                             Chief Executive Officer

Date:  December 10, 2004      /s/ Christopher I. Naunton
                             --------------------------------
                             Christopher I. Naunton
                             Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>
 
================================================================================
                                   EXHIBIT 11

                         RICHMOND COUNTY FINANCIAL CORP.
                        EARNINGS PER SHARE RECONCILIATION


The following table is the reconciliation of basic and diluted EPS as required
under SFAS 128 at June 30, 1998.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                              Loss                  Shares                   Per Share
                                                           (Numerator)           (Denominator)                Amounts
                                                         ------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               (In Thousands, Except Share and Per Share Amounts)

<S>                                                         <C>                    <C>                       <C> 
Net loss                                                    $ (3,988)
                                                        ==================
Basic EPS:
    Loss available to common stockholders                   $ (3,988)              24,328,143                $ ( 0.16)
Effect of dilutive securities:
    Options                                                        -                        -                       -
                                                        ------------------      -----------------         ----------------
Diluted EPS:
    Loss available to common stockholders                   $ (3,988)              24,328,143                $  (0.16)
                                                        ==================      =================         ================
</TABLE>

                                      80
### §3007. Training and physical fitness

#### (a) Training

The Secretary may take such measures as may be necessary to ensure that officers are prepared to carry out their duties in the commissioned officer corps of the Administration and proficient in the skills necessary to carry out such duties. Such measures may include the following:

(1) Carrying out training programs and correspondence courses, including establishing and operating a basic officer training program to provide initial indoctrination and maritime vocational training for officer candidates as well as refresher training, mid-career training, aviation training, and such other training as the Secretary considers necessary for officer development and proficiency.

(2) Providing officers and officer candidates with educational materials.

(3) Acquiring such equipment as may be necessary for training and instructional purposes.

#### (b) Physical fitness

The Secretary shall ensure that officers maintain a high physical state of readiness by establishing standards of physical fitness for officers that are substantially equivalent to those prescribed for officers in the Coast Guard.

(Pub. L. 107–372, title II, §217, as added Pub. L. 116–259, title I, §104(a), Dec. 23, 2020, 134 Stat. 1156.)
CERTIFICATIONS

I, Keith E. Palmer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this  quarterly  report on Form 10-QSB of American Bio Medica
Corporation;

2. Based on my  knowledge,  this  quarterly  report  does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the  circumstances  under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.  Based  on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition,  results of operations and cash flows of the small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business  issuer's other certifying  officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining  disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and
have:

a) designed such disclosure  controls and procedures,  or caused such disclosure
controls and  procedures to be designed  under our  supervision,  to ensure that
material  information  relating  to the small  business  issuer,  including  its
consolidated subsidiaries,  is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)[omitted]; and

c)  evaluated  the  effectiveness  of the  small  business  issuer's  disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our  conclusions  about the
effectiveness  of the disclosure  controls and procedures,  as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business  issuer's  internal
control  over  financial  reporting  that  occurred  during  the small  business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business  issuer's  fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual  report) that has  materially  affected,  or is
reasonably  likely to materially  affect,  the small business  issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business  issuer's other certifying  officers and I have disclosed,
based  on  our  most  recent  evaluation  of  internal  control  over  financial
reporting,  to the small business  issuer's  auditors and the audit committee of
the small  business  issuer's  board of  directors  (or persons  performing  the
equivalent functions):

a) all  significant  deficiencies  and  material  weaknesses  in the  design  or
operation of internal  control over  financial  reporting  which are  reasonably
likely to  adversely  affect  the small  business  issuer's  ability  to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any  fraud,  whether  or not  material,  that  involves  management  or other
employees who have a significant  role in the small business  issuer's  internal
control over financial reporting; and


/s/ Keith E. Palmer
-------------------
Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President

Date: August 10, 2004
### §494a. Study of bridges over navigable waters

The Commandant of the Coast Guard shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a comprehensive study on the construction or alteration of any bridge, drawbridge, or causeway over the navigable waters of the United States with a channel depth of 25 feet or greater that may impede or obstruct future navigation to or from port facilities and for which a permit under the Act of March 23, 1906 (33 U.S.C. 491 et seq.), popularly known as the Bridge Act of 1906, was requested during the period beginning on January 1, 2006, and ending on August 3, 2011.

(Pub. L. 111–281, title IX, §905, Oct. 15, 2010, 124 Stat. 3012; Pub. L. 112–213, title VII, §702(a), Dec. 20, 2012, 126 Stat. 1580.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Act of March 23, 1906 (33 U.S.C. 491 et seq.), popularly known as the Bridge Act of 1906, referred to in text, is act Mar. 23, 1906, ch. 1130, 34 Stat. 84, which enacted sections 491 to 494 and 495 to 498 of this title. For complete classification of this Act of the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 491 of this title and Tables.

#### Amendments

2012—Pub. L. 112–213 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "The Commandant of the Coast Guard shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a comprehensive study on the proposed construction or alteration of any bridge, drawbridge, or causeway over navigable waters with a channel depth of 25 feet or greater of the United States that may impede or obstruct future navigation to or from port facilities."
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 4523

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. JAMES DEAN HAM , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Statesville

. Kenneth D. Bell , District Judge. ( 5:05

- cr - 00006

- KDB

- DSC

- 1 )

Submitted : September 23, 2020 Decided: October 6, 2020

Before NIEMEYER and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Eric Anthony Bach, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. R. Andrew Murray, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Amy E. Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: James D. Ham appeals the 37

- month sentence imposed upon revocati on of his supervised release. On appeal, Ham argues only that the revocation sentence was procedurally unreasonable because the district court failed to explain its decision to impose

a sentence consecutive to the sentence for Ham’s new criminal convictio ns . We affirm

. “A district court has broad discretion when imposing a sentence upon revocation of supervised release.” United States v. Webb , 738 F.3d 638, 640 (4th Cir. 2013). “We will affirm a revocation sentence if it is within the statutory maximu m and is not plainly unreasonable.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). In reviewing revocation sentences,

“ w e first must determine whether the sentence is procedurally or substantively reasonable,” evaluating the same general considerations employed in our review of original sentences. United States v. Slappy , 872 F.3d 202, 207 (4th Cir. 2017). “A revocation sentence is procedurally reasonable if the district court adequately explains the chosen sentence after considering the Sentencing Guidelines’ nonbinding Chapter Seven policy statements and the applicable 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.” Slappy , 872 F.3d at 207 ( footnote omitted). If we find a sentence unreasonable, then we proceed to determine whether it is “plainly”

so. Webb , 738 F. 3d at 640

. We have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that Ham’s plea agreement provided that the revocation sentence was to run consecutive to the term imposed on the new criminal convictions, and the sentence is not plainly unreasonable.3 Therefore, we affirm the revocation judgment. 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
108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1609

AN ACT

To redesignate the facility of the United States

Postal Service located at 201 West Boston Streetin Brookfield, Missouri, as the ‘‘Admiral DonaldDavis Post Office Building’’.

108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1609

AN ACT

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 201 West Boston Street in Brookfield,

Missouri, as the ‘‘Admiral Donald Davis Post Office

Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1609 EH

1 SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 201 West Boston Street in Brookfield, Missouri,

4 and known as the Brookfield Main Office, shall be known

5 and designated as the ‘‘Admiral Donald Davis Post Office

6 Building’’.

7 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

8 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

9 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility

10 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

11 to the ‘‘Admiral Donald Davis Post Office Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives May 7, 2003.

Attest:

Clerk.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 166

To repeal limitations under the Home Investment Partnerships Act on the 

percentage of the operating budget of an organization receiving assistance 

under such Act that may be funded under such Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 7, 2003

Mr. REYNOLDS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL

To repeal limitations under the Home Investment Partnerships Act on the percentage of the operating budget 

of an organization receiving assistance under such Act 

that may be funded under such Act.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF LIMITATIONS ON HOME PROGRAM 

4 ASSISTANCE AS PERCENTAGE OF OPERATING 

5 BUDGET. 

6 (a) HOUSING EDUCATION AND ORGANIZATIONAL

7 SUPPORT.—Section 233(d) of the Cranston-Gonzalez Na-
2

•HR 166 IH 

1 tional Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12773(d)) is 

2 amended—

3 (1) by striking ‘‘may not—’’ and all that fol4 lows through ‘‘(1)’’ and inserting ‘‘may not’’; and 

5 (2) by striking ‘‘; or’’ at the end of paragraph 

6 (1) and all that follows through the end of para7 graph (2) and inserting a period. 

8 (b) OTHER SUPPORT FOR STATE AND LOCAL HOUS9 ING STRATEGIES.—The first sentence of section 243(b) of 

10 the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act 

11 (42 U.S.C. 12783(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘and shall 

12 provide not more than 20 percent of the operating budget 

13 of the contracting organization in any one year’’.

Æ
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

      ( print page 64106)    
                    Notice is hereby given that, on September 17, 2004, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), InterNational Electrical Testing Association (“NETA”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.                

Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization is: InterNational Electrical Testing Association, Morrison, CO. The nature and scope of NETA's standards development activities are: To provide electrical acceptance testing standards and specifications which provide requirements for the testing of newly installed electrical equipment and systems, and to provide electrical maintenance testing standards and specifications which provide requirements for the testing of existing electrical facilities.

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 04-24562  Filed 11-2-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court Cause No. DA 22
- 0659 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,
v. MICHAEL JOE PAINTER,

Defendant and Appellant. **ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME** Upon consideration of Appellant’s first motion for extension of time to file his opening brief, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including March 4 , 2023 within which to file his openi ng brief.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court January 31 2023

01/31/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0659