alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 185.124 Subpoenas for attendance at hearing. ( a ) A party wishing to procure the appearance and testimony of any individual at the hearing may request that the ALJ issue a subpoena.
( b ) A subpoena requiring the attendance and testimony of an individual may also require the individual to produce documents at the hearing.
( c ) A party seeking a subpoena shall file a written request therefor not less than 15 days before the date fixed for the hearing unless otherwise allowed by the ALJ upon a showing of good cause. Such request shall specify any documents to be produced and shall designate the witnesses and describe the address and location thereof with sufficient particularity to permit such witnesses to be found.
( d ) The subpoena shall specify the time and place at which the witness is to appear and any documents the witness is to produce.
( e ) The party seeking the subpoena shall serve it in the manner prescribed in § 185.108. A subpoena on a party or upon an individual under the control of a party may be served by first class mail.
( f ) A party or the individual to whom the subpoena is directed may file with the ALJ a motion to quash the subpoena within 10 days after service or on or before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance if it is less than 10 days after service.
##### 



Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Auditors

The Board of Directors
Raindance Communications, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements on
Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-44348 and 333-82266) and Form S-3 (No. 333-88734) of
Raindance Communications, Inc. of our report dated February 7, 2003, relating
to the consolidated balance sheets of Raindance Communications, Inc. and
subsidiary as of December 31, 2001 and 2002, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders equity (deficit) and comprehensive
loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 2002, which report appears in the December 31, 2002 Annual Report
on Form 10-K of Raindance Communications, Inc.

KPMG LLP

Boulder, Colorado
March 26, 2003
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

                    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”), American Gas Association (“AGA”) 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 involving 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: American Gas Association, Washington, DC. The nature and scope of AGA's standards development activities are: (1) Installation and operation of gas piping and equipment on customer premises, (2) gas measurement and metering, (3) gas transmission and distribution piping systems, (4) gas engineering and operating practices, and (5) gas fire prevention and safety.

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 04-24557  Filed 11-2-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
### §702a–1b. Further modification; adoption

The project for flood control of the Lower Mississippi River adopted by sections 642a, 702a to 702a–1a, 702a–2 to 702d, and 702e to 702h, 702i to 702m, and 704 of this title is modified and, as modified, is authorized and adopted.

(Aug. 18, 1941, ch. 377, §3, 55 Stat. 642.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 702a–13⁄4 of this title.
During the pendency of this action, Gordon I. Ito (Ito or 1

Insurance Commissioner Ito) succeeded J.P. Schmidt (Schmidt, Insurance

Commissioner, or Insurance Commissioner Schmidt) as Insurance Commissioner. 

Therefore pursuant to Hawai#i Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 43(c)(1)

(2010), Ito has been substituted for Schmidt. 

NOS. SCWC-28314 and SCWC-28315

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

CHUNG MI AHN,

Respondent/Claimant/Appellant/Appellee-Appellee,

vs.

LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Petitioner/Respondent/Appellee/Appellant-Cross-Appellee,

and

GORDON I. ITO, Insurance Commissioner, 1

Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs,

Respondent/Appellee/Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

(SCWC-28314)

KEE SUN KIM,

Respondent/Claimant/Appellee/Appellant-Cross Appellee,

vs.

LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,

Petitioner/Respondent/Appellee/Appellant-Cross-appellee,

and

GORDON I ITO, Insurance Commissioner,

Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs,

Respondent/Appellee/Appellee-Cross-appellant.

(SCWC-28315)

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-28314

10-OCT-2011

09:48 AM
2

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(ICA NO. 28314 (CIV. NO. 05-1-2265) and 

ICA NO. 28315 (CIV. NO. 06-1-0994))

ORDER OF CORRECTION

(By: Nakayama, Acting C.J., Acoba, Duffy and McKenna, JJ., and

Circuit Judge Chang, in place of Recktenwald, C.J., recused)

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Opinion of the Court,

filed October 4, 2011, is corrected as follows:

1. Page 2: underscore OPINION OF THE COURT BY

MCKENNA, J.

2. Page 8, at 2.: underscore Gamata v. Allstate Ins.

Co.

3. Page 8, second full paragraph, line 1: underscore

Wilson

4. Page 14, line 2: remove single space indentation

before “Based”

5. Page 20, second full paragraph, line 2: underscore

Zanakis-Pico v. Cutter Dodge, Inc.

6. Page 20, second full paragraph, line 5 to line 6:

underscore Allstate Ins. Co. v. Schmidt

7. Page 21, line 2 to line 3: underscore “when the

language of the statute is ambiguous or produces an absurd or

unjust result.”

8. Page 21, line 3 to line 4: underscore Estate of

Roxas v. Marcos
3

The Clerk of the Court is directed to take all

necessary steps to notify the publishing agencies of these

changes.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, October 10, 2011.

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.

/s/ James E. Duffy, Jr.

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Gary W.B. Chang
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1638

To amend the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 to repeal 

the authorized 2005 round of closures and realignments of military 

installations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 3, 2003

Mr. TAYLOR of Mississippi (for himself, Mr. EVANS, Mr. ROGERS of Alabama, 

Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. RODRIGUEZ, Mr. FORBES, Mr. SIMMONS, Mr. KANJORSKI, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. DAVIS of Tennessee, and Mr. PICKERING) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 

Armed Services 

A BILL

To amend the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act 

of 1990 to repeal the authorized 2005 round of closures 

and realignments of military installations.

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 ‘‘BRAC Repeal Act of 

5 2003’’. 
2

•HR 1638 IH 

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF AUTHORIZATION FOR AN ADDITIONAL 

2 ROUND OF BASE REALIGNMENTS AND CLO3 SURES IN 2005. 

4 (a) REPEAL.—The Defense Base Closure and Re5 alignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public 

6 Law 101–510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) is amended by strik7 ing sections 2906A, 2912, 2913, and 2914, as added by 

8 title XXX of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

9 Fiscal Year 2002 (Public Law 107–107; 115 Stat. 1342). 

10 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 2904(a)(3) 

11 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 

12 1990, as amended by section 3004 of the National De13 fense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (115 Stat. 

14 1347), is amended by striking ‘‘in the 2005 report’’and 

15 inserting ‘‘in a report submitted after 2001’’.

Æ
§ 2100.5 Access by individuals. ( a ) No individual will be allowed access to any information compiled or maintained in reasonable anticipation of civil actions or proceedings, or otherwise exempt under § 2100.12. Requests for pending investigations will be denied and the requester instructed to forward another request giving adequate time for the investigation to be completed. Requesters shall be provided the telephone number so they can call and check on the status in order to know when to resubmit the request.
( b ) Any individual may authorize the facility to provide a copy of his/her records to a third party. This authorization must be in writing and shall be provided to the facility with the initial request.
( c ) Access to records may be authorized to the legal guardian or conservator acting on behalf of an individual who has been declared to be incompetent due to physical or mental incapacity or age by a court of competent jurisdiction.
( d ) When an individual requesting access to his/her record wishes to be accompanied by another individual during the course of the examination of the record, the individual making the request shall submit to the official having operational control of the record, a signed statement authorizing that person access to the record.
( e ) If medical records are requested and a USSAH or USNH practitioner believes that access to the records by the subject could harm that person's mental or physical health, the requester will be asked to name a practitioner to receive the records. If this requirement poses a hardship on the individual, he/she will be offered the service of an USSAH or USNH practitioner other than the one who provided treatment. If the individual refuses to name a recipient, the record will not be released.
### **CHAPTER 65—INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION**

Sec.
6501.
Definitions.
6502.
Information on grants received.
6503.
Intergovernmental financing.
6504.
Use of existing State or multimember agency to administer grant programs.
6505.
Authority to provide specialized or technical services.
6506.
Development assistance.
6507.
Congressional review of grant programs.
6508.
Studies and reports.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**1990**—Pub. L. 101–453, §5(c), Oct. 24, 1990, 104 Stat. 1061, substituted "Intergovernmental financing" for "Transfer and deposit requirements" in item 6503.
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-16-00273-CV

IN RE MINDI SPEARS

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied, and the emergency motion for stay 

is dismissed as moot.

REX D. DAVIS

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and 

Justice Scoggins

Denied

Opinion delivered and filed September 14, 2016

[CV06]
#### § 2604.105 Other rights and services.

Nothing in this part will be construed to entitle any person, as of right, to any service or to the disclosure of any record to which such person is not entitled under the FOIA.
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.                  

###### Federal Trade Commission

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sandra M. Peay, Contact Representative or Renee Hallman, Case Management Assistant, Federal Trade Commission, Premerger Notification Office, Bureau of Competition, Room H-303, Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-3100.

By Direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04-24425  Filed 11-1-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 6148** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. BRIAN LINTON, a/k/a Bee , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at New Bern . Malcolm J. Howard , Senior District Judge. ( 4:95

- cr - 00041

- H

- 3 )

Submitted : August 16 , 2012 Decided: August 20, 2012

Before KING and THACKER , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Brian Linton, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Gray Walker, United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Brian Linton seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion for reconsideration of the district court ’ s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2012 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice o r judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (2006).
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “ a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. ” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006)
. When the district cour t denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the d enial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Linton has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, although we grant Linton’s pending motion to seal, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We3 dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
§ 1653.11 Definitions. ( a ) Definitions generally applicable to the Thrift Savings Plan are set forth at 5 CFR 1690.1.
( b ) As used in this subpart:
*Alimony* means the payment of funds for the support and maintenance of a spouse or former spouse. Alimony includes separate maintenance, alimony *pendente lite,* maintenance, and spousal support. Alimony can also include attorney fees, interest, and court costs, but only if these items are expressly made recoverable by qualifying legal process, as described in § 1653.12.
*Child support* means payment of funds for the support and maintenance of a child or children of the participant. Child support includes payments to provide for health care, education, recreation, clothing, or to meet other specific needs of a child or children. Child support can also include attorney fees, interest, and court costs, but only if these items are expressly made recoverable by qualifying legal process, as described in § 1653.12.
*Competent authority* means a court or an administrative agency of competent jurisdiction in any State, territory or possession of the United States; a court or administrative agency of competent jurisdiction in any foreign country with which the United States has entered into an agreement that requires the United States to honor the process; or an authorized official pursuant to an order of such a court or an administrative agency of competent jurisdiction pursuant to state or local law.
*Legal process* means a writ, order, summons, or other similar process in the nature of a garnishment, which is brought to enforce a participant's legal obligations to pay child support or alimony currently.
[68 FR 35510, June 13, 2003, as amended at 76 FR 78095, Dec. 16, 2011]
### §5143. Payment for services

The Secretary of the Treasury shall impose charges for Bureau of Engraving and Printing services the Secretary provides to an agency or to a foreign government under section 5114. The charges shall be in amounts the Secretary considers adequate to cover the costs of the services (including administrative and other costs related to providing the services). The agency shall pay promptly bills submitted by the Secretary, and the Secretary shall take such action, in coordination with the Secretary of State, as may be appropriate to ensure prompt payment by a foreign government of any invoice or statement of account submitted by the Secretary with respect to services rendered under section 5114.

(Pub. L. 97–258, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 991; Pub. L. 108–458, title VI, §6301(b), Dec. 17, 2004, 118 Stat. 3748.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 5143 | 31:181. | Aug. 4, 1950, ch. 558, §1, 64 Stat. 408. |

The word "costs" is substituted for "direct and indirect costs" to eliminate unnecessary words. The words "shall make payment therefor" are omitted as unnecessary because of the restatement. The words "from funds available to it for such purposes" are omitted as surplus.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2004—Pub. L. 108–458 inserted "or to a foreign government under section 5114" after "provides to an agency", "and other" after "including administrative", and ", and the Secretary shall take such action, in coordination with the Secretary of State, as may be appropriate to ensure prompt payment by a foreign government of any invoice or statement of account submitted by the Secretary with respect to services rendered under section 5114" before period at end.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION**


**PURSUANT
      TO SECITON 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**


**(SUBSECTIONS
      (A0 AND (B) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF**


**TITLE
      18, UNITED STATES CODE)**





Pursuant
      to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
      undersigned officers of U.S. Wireless Data, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
      “Company”), does herby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





The
      Form
      10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 (the “Form 10-QSB”) of the Company
      fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.





Date: May 15, 2006
              /s/Robert Ellin
                Robert Ellin, Chief Executive OfficerDate: May 15, 2006
              /s/Jay Wolf
                Jay Wolf, Chief Operating Officer and Chief
                  Financial
                  Officer




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 Comission or its staff upon request.
Editorial Note on Part 352
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 352 appear at 69 FR 2050, Jan. 13, 2004.

§ 352.203 Standards for issuing Letters of Authority. OPM will determine the standards to be used in issuing Letters of Authority, which shall include the following: ( a ) The positions to be filled must be related to emergency situations for which the usual recruiting methods are inadequate.
( b ) The positions must be a part of a specific program immediately essential to the national interest.
( c ) The positions must be essential to the functioning of the program.
( d ) There must be substantial basis for the belief that reemployment rights will be a significant and reasonable aid in meeting the emergency situation.
NRC NEWS U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 Office of Public Affairs Region IV 

 611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

 Arlington, TX 76011-4005

No. IV-06-012 May 11, 2006

Contact: Victor Dricks E-Mail: opa4@nrc.gov

Phone: 817-860-8128

NRC TO DISCUSS 2005 PERFORMANCE AT WATERFORD NUCLEAR PLANT

Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with Entergy Operations officials on May

18, to discuss the NRC’s annual assessment of safety performance at the Waterford 3 nuclear

plant during 2005.

The 6:30 p.m. meeting at the James M. Cain Energy Education Center, 4224 Hwy. 3127,

Killona, La., is open to public observation. Before the session ends, NRC staff will be available

to answer questions on the plant’s safety performance, as well as the agency’s role in ensuring

safe plant operation.

“Each year, the NRC assesses the performance of all of the nation’s commercial nuclear

power plants,” said Region IV Administrator Bruce S. Mallett. “The meeting gives us an

opportunity to discuss our findings with the company, local officials and members of the public.

We look forward to meeting with members of the community and answering any questions they

may have about our oversight.”

A letter sent from the NRC Region IV Office to plant officials addresses the performance

of the plant during 2005 and will serve as the basis for the meeting discussion. It is available on

the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/wat_2005q4.pdf .

Overall, Waterford 3 operated safely during the period. The NRC uses color-coded

inspection findings and performance indicators to assess nuclear power plant performance. The

colors start with “green” and then increase to “white,” “yellow” or “red,” commensurate with the

safety significance of the issues involved. Because all of the inspection findings and performance

indicators for the plant during the last quarter of 2005 were determined to be “green,” Waterford

3 will receive a baseline (or routine) level of inspections during the upcoming assessment

period. 
Routine inspections are performed by two NRC Resident Inspectors assigned to the plant

and by inspection specialists from the Region IV Office in Arlington, Texas. Among the areas of

plant operations to be inspected during the next year by NRC specialists are emergency

preparedness and radiological safety.

Current performance information for Waterford 3 is available on the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/WAT3/wat3_chart.html .

###