alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 550.1108 Requesting recovery through centralized administrative offset.

Under 31 U.S.C. 3716, creditor agencies must notify the Secretary of the Treasury of all debts that are delinquent as defined in the FCCS (over 180 days) so that recovery may be made by centralized administrative offset. This includes those debts the agency seeks to recover from the pay account of an employee of another agency via salary offset. The Secretary of the Treasury and other Federal disbursing officials will match payments, including Federal salary payments, against these debts. Where a match occurs, and all the requirements for offset have been met, the payments will be offset to collect the debt. Prior to offset of the pay account of an employee, an agency must comply with the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 5514, this subpart, and agency regulations issued thereunder. Specific procedures for notifying the Secretary of the Treasury of a debt for purposes of collection by centralized administrative offset are contained in 31 CFR part 285 and the FCCS. At its discretion, a creditor agency may notify the Secretary of the Treasury of debts that have been delinquent for 180 days or less, including debts the agency seeks to recover from the pay account of an employee via salary offset.

[63 FR 72101, Dec. 31, 1998]
EMPLOYER STATUS DETERMINATION

Horry County Railway Company

This is the determination of the Railroad Retirement Board regarding the status of

Horry County Railway Company (HCRC) as an employer under the Railroad Retirement

Act (45 U.S.C. §231 et seq.) (RRA) and Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (45

U.S.C. §351 et sea.HRUIA).

In Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) Finance Docket 31159, Waccamaw

Coastline Railroad, Co., Inc. (WCRC) filed for a modified certificate of public

convenience and necessity. WCRC entered into an agreement with HCRC to operate

14.10 miles of track located between milepost ACD 336.10 at Conway, South

Carolina and milepost ACD 350.21 at Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. WCRC began

operations of this line on October 10, 1987. In an undated "Rating Instructions to

Employer" form, Mr. Willard Formydual, President of HCRC, stated that HCRC's

operations were closed out by the county and leased to another operator.

Information in the record establishes that HCRC is no longer in business and that it

was last in business in 1987. Accordingly, the Board finds that effective with the

close of business October 10, 1987, Horry County Railway Company ceased to be

an employer under the RRA and the RUIA.

Glen L. Bower

Jerome F. Kever

BCD 1995-62 BA # 2567
### **CHAPTER 305—BLUE STAR MOTHERS OF AMERICA, INC.**

Sec.
30501.
Definition.
30502.
Organization.
30503.
Purposes.
30504.
Membership.
30505.
Governing body.
30506.
Powers.
30507.
Exclusive right to name, seals, emblems, and badges.
30508.
Restrictions.
30509.
Principal office.
30510.
Records and inspection.
30511.
Service of process.
30512.
Liability for acts of officers and agents.
30513.
Annual report.
30514.
Distribution of assets on dissolution or final liquidation.
Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards: Commercial Clothes Washers Final Rule Analysis Spreadsheets

 

Search Help More Search Options

EERE Information Center 

Printable Version Programs and Offices

Commercial Clothes Washers Final Rule Analysis Spreadsheets

This page presents analytical spreadsheets that provide rulemaking findings and interactive 

tools for the life-cycle cost analysis, national impact analysis, government regulatory impact 

model, and regulatory impact analysis for commercial clothes washers. Instructions for using 

the life-cycle cost analysis and national impact analysis spreadsheets can be found in the final 

rule technical support document.

● Life-Cycle Cost Analysis (Excel 520 KB)

● National Impact Analysis (Excel 1 MB)

● Government Regulatory Impact Model (Excel 1 MB) 

● Regulatory Impact Analysis (Excel 2 MB)

Contact Information

Stephen Witkowski, P.E.

Project Manager 

202-586-7463

Printable Version

Building Technologies Program Home | EERE Home | U.S. Department of Energy

Webmaster | Web Site Policies | Security & Privacy | USA.gov

Content Last Updated: 01/04/2010 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/clothes_washers_ecs_final_rule_analysis_tools.html (1 of 2) [1/22/2010 4:11:47 PM]

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.2
Appliances and Commercial Equipment Standards: Commercial Clothes Washers Final Rule Analysis Spreadsheets

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/commercial/clothes_washers_ecs_final_rule_analysis_tools.html (2 of 2) [1/22/2010 4:11:47 PM]

EERE-2006-STD-0127 COMMENT 69.2
# L_2018080EN.01002101.xml

| 22.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 80/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 80/21

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 179/2016

of 23 September 2016

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2018/437]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/1179 of 19 July 2016 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/1179 of 19 July 2016 amending, for the purposes of its adaptation to technical and scientific progress, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indent is added in point 12zze (Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Chapter XV of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32016 R 1179: Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/1179 of 19 July 2016 (OJ L 195, 20.7.2016, p. 11).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32016 R 1179: Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/1179 of 19 July 2016 (OJ L 195, 20.7.2016, p. 11).’

Article 2

The text of Regulation (EU) 2016/1179 in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 24 September 2016, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 23 September 2016.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Bergdís ELLERTSDÓTTIR

---

(1)  
  OJ L 195, 20.7.2016, p. 11.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
### §368. Secrecy of certain inventions; filing international applications in foreign countries

(a) International applications filed in the Patent and Trademark Office shall be subject to the provisions of chapter 17.

(b) In accordance with article 27(8) of the treaty, the filing of an international application in a country other than the United States on the invention made in this country shall be considered to constitute the filing of an application in a foreign country within the meaning of chapter 17, whether or not the United States is designated in that international application.

(c) If a license to file in a foreign country is refused or if an international application is ordered to be kept secret and a permit refused, the Patent and Trademark Office when acting as a Receiving Office, International Searching Authority, or International Preliminary Examining Authority, may not disclose the contents of such application to anyone not authorized to receive such disclosure.

(Added Pub. L. 94–131, §1, Nov. 14, 1975, 89 Stat. 687; amended Pub. L. 98–622, title IV, §403(a), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3392; Pub. L. 99–616, §6, Nov. 6, 1986, 100 Stat. 3486; Pub. L. 112–29, §20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 335.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2011—Subsecs. (a), (b). Pub. L. 112–29 struck out "of this title" after "17".

1986—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 99–616 substituted a comma for "or" after "Receiving Office" and "International Preliminary Examining Authority" for "both".

1984—Subsecs. (a), (c). Pub. L. 98–622 substituted "Patent and Trademark Office" for "Patent Office".

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

#### Effective Date of 2011 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to proceedings commenced on or after that effective date, see section 20(l) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1986 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 99–616 effective July 1, 1987, and applicable to all international applications pending before or after that date, see section 9 of Pub. L. 99–616, set out as a note under section 351 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–622 effective Nov. 8, 1984, see section 406(a) of Pub. L. 98–622, set out as a note under section 351 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 24, 1978, and applicable to international and national applications filed on and after that date, see section 11 of Pub. L. 94–131, set out as a note under section 351 of this title.
#### In the Matter of Clarence Jernigan, Respondent, against New York State Labor Relations Board, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — • Glennon, J. P., Dore, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.; Callahan and Shientag, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse.
* Pursua nt to 5 T H C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED
February 10, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-40852 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MOSES C. SALDUA,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

(2:03-CR-393-1)

Before JONES, BARKSDALE, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Moses C. Saldua appeals his guilty-plea convictions for the

simultaneous possession of a firearm and ammunition under 18 U.S.C.

§ 922(g)(1), contending the convictions are multiplicitous and

violate double jeopardy. The Government does not seek to rely on

Saldua’s claimed waiver of appeal; therefore, this court will not

enforce it. S ee United States v. Rhodes , 253 F.3d 8 00, 804 (5th

Cir. 2001).2

As the Government concedes, simultaneous convictions and

sentences for the same criminal act involving possession of a

firearm and possession of ammunition violate double jeopar d y.

United States v. Berry , 977 F.2d 915, 919 (5th Cir. 1992). The

district court’s ordering Saldua’s sentences to run concurrently

does not change this result. I d. at 920; United States v.
Kimbrough
, 69 F.3d 723, 729 (5th Cir. 1995), cert. denied
, 517 U.S.

1157 (1996). Accordingly, we V ACATE Saldua’s sentences and R EMAND

for dismissal of one of the duplicitous convictions, at the
election of the Government, and for resentencing.

VACATED AND REMANDED
June 30, 2008 

 IN RESPONSE, PLEASE 

REFER TO: M080604 

 

MEMORANDUM TO: R. W. Borchardt 

 Executive Director for Operations 

FROM: Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary /RA/ 

SUBJECT: STAFF REQUIREMENTS - BRIEFING ON RESULTS OF THE 

AGENCY ACTION REVIEW MEETING (AARM), 9:00 A.M., 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 4, 2008, COMMISSIONERS’ 

CONFERENCE ROOM, ONE WHITE FLINT NORTH, 

ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND (OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE) 

The Commission was briefed by the NRC staff on the results of its annual Agency Action 

Review Meeting (AARM) held on May 2, 2008. In addition, representatives of two licensees, 

Arizona Public Service (APS) and Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS), briefed the Commission on 

their respective actions to achieve, internalize, and sustain performance improvement. 

The Commission recognizes that the Reactor Oversight Program (ROP) has become a mature 

program that will be refined continuously through lessons learned and feedback. The staff 

should look for ways to clarify to industry and the public the meaning and use of “green” 

performance indicators within the ROP. In its next paper on ROP self-assessment, the staff 

should evaluate possible improvements to the ROP self-assessment metrics for performance 

indicators and the significance determination process.

The Commission is supportive of the ongoing staff efforts to assure that the agency’s actions 

associated with the resident inspector program results in a stable or increasing resident 

inspector experience base, including measures to enhance the visibility of the resident 

inspectors within the agency. If the staff evaluations of resident demographics and the reasons 

for leaving the resident program reflect a need for additional measures including, for example, 

adjustments in compensation, the staff should make appropriate recommendations to the 

Commission. 

cc: Chairman Klein 

 Commissioner Jaczko 

 Commissioner Lyons 

 Commissioner Svinicki 

 OGC 

 CFO 

 OCA 

 OIG 

 OPA 

 Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACNW, ASLBP (via E-Mail) 

 PDR
(May 10, 1948.)

#### Raffaela Ammirati, Appellant, v. Wire Forms, Inc., et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants.

Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, with costs, defendants’ motion for judgment dismissing the complaint denied, and plaintiff’s motion for judgment as prayed for in the complaint granted, with costs, to the extent of declaring that plaintiff has an easement or right of way for driveway purposes over the strip of land eight-feet wide immediately adjoining on the south side of plaintiff’s premises. The case of *Buffalo Acad, of Sacred Heart*V. *Boehm Bros.*(267 N. Y. 242) is inapplicable. It deals only with a covenant imposing building restrictions upon the use to which the property may be put. Such restrictions are not analogous to an easement. That ease, therefore, must be confined to its own facts. Moreover, an examination of the title of defendant Wire Forms, Inc., would have disclosed, in the deed of Rebecca Dashéff to the L. R. S. Building Corporation, the creation of the easement in question. The existence upon the record of this deed containing the easement must be regarded as constructive notice to defendant Wire Forms, Inc. Findings of fact and conclusions of law inconsistent herewith are reversed and new findings and conclusions will be made. Lewis, P. J., Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur; Wenzel, J., concurs on the ground first stated. Settle order on notice.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                  [MERRILL LYNCH CREDIT CORPORATION LETTERHEAD]


                              OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE
                        ANNUAL STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE

               RE:   Wells Fargo, formerly known as Norwest Bank Minnesota, as
                     Trustee for Sequoia Mortgage
                     Trust 4 ("Issuer"),
                     Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation ("Company"),
                     Servicing Agreement dated as of March 7, 1997 ("Agreement")



        Pursuant to the above Agreement, the Company hereby states:

        1. A review of the activities of the Company during the 2000 calendar
year and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under the
supervision of each of the undersigned officers.

        2. To the best of each such officer's knowledge, based on such review,
the Company has fulfilled all of its material obligations under the Agreement in
all material respects throughout such year.


Dated:  March 30, 2001



                                          Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation


                                          By:   /s/ Gary M. Mann
                                          ---------------------------------
                                          Gary M. Mann, Vice President


                                          By:   /s/ Kevin O'Hanlon
                                          ---------------------------------
                                          Kevin O'Hanlon, President & COO
#### Edward M. Frankel et al., Respondents, v. Ufinindo International Corporation et al., Appellants.

Present — Peek, P. J., Glennon, Dore, Cohn and Shientag, JJ.
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION I

475 Allendale Road

King of Prussia, PA 19406

No. I-01-023 May 9, 2001

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

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

NRC CHAIRMAN TO HOLD NEWS BRIEFING AFTER VISIT TO N.Y. NUCLEAR PLANTS

Dr. Richard Meserve, chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, will visit the James A.

FitzPatrick and Nine Mile Point 1 and 2 nuclear power plants on Monday, May 14. He will tour the

plants and meet with managers and staff at the Scriba, N.Y., facilities, which are operated by Entergy

Nuclear Northeast and Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., respectively.

At 3 p.m. in the FitzPatrick Training Center, on Lake Road in Scriba, Chairman Meserve will

meet with interested news media representatives to discuss his visit and answer any questions reporters

may have about NRC oversight of the plants.

Dr. Meserve was sworn in as chairman of the NRC on October 29, 1999. Prior to that, he was a

partner in the Washington, D.C., law firm of Covington & Burling, having joined the firm in 1981.

From 1977 to 1981, he served on the White House staff as legal counsel to the President’s Science and

Technology Advisor. He has also served as chairman or a member of several National Academy of

Sciences committees.

For a more detailed version of Dr. Meserve’s biography, visit the NRC web site at:

www.nrc.gov/NRC/WHATIS/meserve.vitae.html

###
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


L\_2017099EN.01002801.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 12.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 99/28 |

---

DECISION No 50/2017 OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED UNDER THE AGREEMENT ON MUTUAL RECOGNITION BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

of 27 March 2017

related to the listing of conformity assessment bodies under the Sectoral Annex for Electromagnetic Compatibility [2017/692]

THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and the United States of America and in particular Article 7 and 14;

Whereas the Joint Committee is to take a decision to list a conformity assessment body or bodies under a Sectoral Annex;

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 1. | The conformity assessment body in Attachment A is added to the list of conformity assessment bodies under column ‘EC access to the US market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex for Electromagnetic Compatibility. |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2. | The specific scope of listing, in terms of products and conformity assessment procedures, of the conformity assessment body indicated in Attachment A has been agreed by the Parties and will be maintained by them. |

This Decision, done in duplicate, shall be signed by representatives of the Joint Committee who are authorised to act on behalf of the Parties for purposes of amending the Agreement. This Decision shall be effective from the date of the later of these signatures.

On behalf of the United States of America

James C. SANFORD

Signed in Washington DC, on 6 March 2017

On behalf of the European Union

Ignacio IRUARRIZAGA

Signed in Brussels, on 27 March 2017

---

Attachment A

EC conformity assessment body added to the list of conformity assessment bodies under column ‘EC access to the US market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex for Electromagnetic Compatibility

| | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | --- | | 7layers GmbH | | Borsigstrasse 11 | | 40880 Ratingen | | GERMANY | |

---
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

RUBEN MARTINEZ-SOLANO,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 12-50245

D.C. No. 3:12-cr-00629-LAB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Larry A. Burns, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 10, 2013** 

Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and BERZON, Circuit Judges.

Ruben Martinez-Solano appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges the 66-month sentence imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for

being a deported alien found in the United States, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

FILED

JUN 13 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 12-50245

Martinez-Solano contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing

to justify the sentence sufficiently and by disregarding his sentencing arguments. 

The court did not err, as the record reflects that it thoroughly explained the reasons

for the sentence and specifically responded to Martinez-Solano’s arguments. See

United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc).

Martinez-Solano further contends that the district court procedurally erred

by basing the sentence on the clearly erroneous finding that he had a record of

violent conduct. The court did not clearly err in its characterization of MartinezSolano’s criminal history.

Martinez-Solano also contends that his sentence is substantively

unreasonable. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing MartinezSolano’s sentence. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The aboveGuidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)

sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including MartinezSolano’s lengthy criminal history and willingness to reoffend despite his prior

sentences for immigration offenses. See id..

To the extent Martinez-Solano argues that the district court placed undue

weight on deterrence in selecting the sentence, we identify no abuse of discretion
3 12-50245

in this regard. See United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir.

2009).

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32.2**STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 1350**      I, Keith Yee, the Chief Financial Officer of Tvia, Inc. (the “Company”), certify for thepurposes of section 1350 of chapter 63 of title 18 of the United States Code that, to the best ofmy knowledge,      (i) theAnnual Report of the Company on Form 10-K/A for the period ended March 31, 2006(the “Report”), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, and      (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.         November 22, 2006           By /s/ Keith Yee Keith Yee      Vice President, Finance and ChiefFinancial Officer