alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §4104. Acquisition of unmanned maritime systems

#### (a) In general

The Administrator shall coordinate and centralize the acquisition by the Administration of unmanned maritime systems to meet the prioritized list of data requirements identified by OAR and OMAO in carrying out this chapter in their regular assessments and approved by the USEOB.

#### (b) Memoranda of understanding

In order to realize greater savings and efficiency, the Administrator may develop and execute a memorandum of agreement with the Secretary of the Navy to—

(1) participate in procurements conducted by the signatories to the memorandum of understanding;

(2) accept decommissioned unmanned maritime systems from the Navy;

(3) develop policies and procedures to share unmanned maritime systems; or

(4) provide for other means of creating efficiency and savings in Federal acquisition of unmanned maritime systems.

#### (c) Rule of construction

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to modify Federal procurement law.

(Pub. L. 115–394, §5, Dec. 21, 2018, 132 Stat. 5285.)
### §12406. Training programs for judges

The State Justice Institute, after consultation with nationally recognized nonprofit organizations with expertise in stalking and domestic violence cases, shall conduct training programs for State (as defined in section 10701 1 of title 42) and Indian tribal judges to ensure that a judge issuing an order in a stalking or domestic violence case has all available criminal history and other information, whether from State or Federal sources.

(Pub. L. 103–322, title IV, §40607, Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1952.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 10701 of title 42, referred to in text, was in the original "section 202 of the State Justice Institute Authorization Act of 1984", and was translated as reading "section 202 of the State Justice Institute Act of 1984", which is section 202 of Pub. L. 98–620, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 14036 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

1 See References in Text note below.
### §289. Additional remedy for infringement of design patent

Whoever during the term of a patent for a design, without license of the owner, (1) applies the patented design, or any colorable imitation thereof, to any article of manufacture for the purpose of sale, or (2) sells or exposes for sale any article of manufacture to which such design or colorable imitation has been applied shall be liable to the owner to the extent of his total profit, but not less than $250, recoverable in any United States district court having jurisdiction of the parties.

Nothing in this section shall prevent, lessen, or impeach any other remedy which an owner of an infringed patent has under the provisions of this title, but he shall not twice recover the profit made from the infringement.

(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 813.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §§74, 75 (Feb. 4, 1887, ch. 105, §§1, 2, 24 Stat. 387, 388).

Language is changed.
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 Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

The Plumas County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will hold a meeting on November 12, 2004 in Quincy, California. The purpose of the November 12 meeting is to review the last funding cycle (five) authorized by the Payments to States legislation. Outreach for the funding cycle will start in early 2005 with projects funded in 2006. Three new members will also be welcomed to the committee, which is starting its second term.

# DATES & ADDRESSES:

The November 12 meeting will take place from 9-12 a.m., in the Mineral Building at the Plumas-Sierra County Fairgrounds, 204 Fairgrounds Road, Quincy, California.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Lee Ann Schramel Taylor, Forest Coordinator, USDA, Plumas National Forest, P.O. Box 11500/159 Lawrence Street, Quincy, CA 95971; (530) 283-7850; or by e-mail                         *eataylor@fs.fed.us*.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Agenda items for the March 19 meeting include: (1) Updates on second committee term; (2) Recognition for outgoing members; (3) Transition discussion for incoming members; (4) Cycle 5 funding planning; (5) Updates on the Plumas County Fire Assessment & Strategy; (6) Chair & Vice Chair nomination/elections; and (7) Future meeting schedule/logistics/agenda.

                    The meetings are open to the public and individuals may address the Committee after being recognized by the Chair. Other RAC information including previous meeting agendas and minutes may be obtained at                     *http://www.fs.fed.us/​payments*.                

Dated: October 29, 2004.

Robert G. MacWhorter,

Deputy Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 04-24714  Filed 11-4-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
# L_2016161EN.01000103.xml

| 18.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 161/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 161/1

---

Information concerning the entry into force of the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Moldova, of the other part

The Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Moldova, of the other part, signed in Brussels on 27 June 2014 in Brussels (1), enters into force on 1 July 2016, in accordance with Article 464(2) of the Agreement, as the last instrument of ratification or approval was deposited on 23 May 2016.

1

---

(1)  
  OJ L 260, 30.8.2014, p. 4.

1

---
#### § 754.103 Applicant representatives.

An applicant may select a representative of the applicant's choice to assist the applicant during the complaint process. An agency may disallow as an applicant's representative an individual whose activities as a representative would cause a conflict of interest or position; an agency employee who cannot be released from official duties because of the priority needs of the Government; or an agency employee whose release would give rise to unreasonable costs to the Government.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1866

To reinstate and transfer a hydroelectric license under the Federal Power 

Act to permit the redevelopment of a hydroelectric project located in 

the State of New York, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 29, 2003

Mr. SWEENEY (for himself and Mr. MCNULTY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL

To reinstate and transfer a hydroelectric license under the 

Federal Power Act to permit the redevelopment of a 

hydroelectric project located in the State of New York, 

and for other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

4 The Congress finds that actions by the Federal En5 ergy Regulatory Commission (FERC) leading to the ac6 ceptance and approval of the surrender of a hydroelectric 

7 license for Project No. 6032, including, but not limited 

8 to, the FERC’s failure to ensure, during the effective pe-
2

HR 1866 IH 

1 riod of the issued hydroelectric license, that the project’s 

2 facilities were adequately maintained and operated, pre3 vented the project from generating electricity and thereby 

4 wasted the hydraulic potential of waters of the United 

5 States. 

6 SEC. 2. REINSTATEMENT AND TRANSFER. 

7 (a) REINSTATEMENT AND TRANSFER OF FEDERAL

8 LICENSE FOR PROJECT NUMBERED 6032.—Notwith9 standing section 8 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 

10 801) or any other provision thereof the FERC is directed 

11 to reinstate the license for Project No. 6032 and to trans12 fer the license, without delay or the institution of any pro13 ceedings, to any prior licensee for Project No. 6032 who 

14 has not been ordered by the New York Public Service 

15 Commission to divest its generation facilities, with a li16 cense term of fifty years running from the date of trans17 fer, within 30 days of enactment of this Act. All deadlines 

18 established under the license, including without limitation 

19 the deadlines for acquisition of project property and for 

20 commencement of construction, shall run from the date 

21 of transfer. 

22 (b) HYDROELECTRIC INCENTIVES.—Project No. 

23 6032 shall be entitled to the full benefit of any legislation 

24 passed by Congress that promotes hydroelectric develop-
3

HR 1866 IH 

1 ment within 2 years either before or after this Act’s effec2 tive date.

Æ
§ 754.203 Procedures. ( a ) *Notice of proposed action.* An employee against whom action is proposed under this subpart is entitled to at least 30 days' advance written notice. The notice must state the specific reason(s) for the proposed action and inform the employee of the right to review the material which is relied on to support the reasons for the proposed action given in the notice before any final decision is made by the Director or Director's designee.
( b ) *Employee's answer.* ( 1 ) An employee may answer orally and in writing. The employee's agency must give the employee a reasonable amount of official time to review the material relied on to support OPM's proposed action, to prepare and present an answer orally and in writing, and to secure affidavits, if the employee is in an active duty status. OPM may require the employee to furnish any answer to the proposed action, and affidavits and other documentary evidence in support of the employee's answer, within such time as would be reasonable, but not less than 7 days.
( 2 ) The Director or Director's Designee may designate an Office of Personnel Management official to hear the employee's oral answer, and confer authority on that person to make or recommend a final decision on the proposed adverse action.
( c ) *Representation.* An employee covered by this part is entitled to be represented by an attorney or other representative. An agency may disallow as an employee's representative an individual whose activities as representative would cause a conflict of interest or position, or an employee of the agency whose release from the employee's official position would give rise to unreasonable costs or whose priority work assignments preclude release.
( d ) *OPM decision.* ( 1 ) In arriving at a decision, the Director or Director's Designee will consider only the complaint, the applicant's supporting material, the agency's administrative file, the reasons specified in the notice of proposed action, and any oral and written answer by the employee or the employee's representative.
( 2 ) The decision notice must specify in writing the reasons for the decision and advise the employee of any appeal rights.
( e ) *Administrative Law Judges.* This section does not apply if the Director or Director's designee believes that an administrative law judge has violated 5 U.S.C. 9202 and part 920 of this chapter.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 65164]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-27483]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9988-20-Region 6]


Underground Injection Control Program; Hazardous Waste Injection 
Restrictions; Petition for Exemption Reissuance--Class I Hazardous 
Waste Injection; TM Corpus Christi Services L.P. (TMCC) Corpus Christi, 
Texas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of a final decision on a UIC no migration petition 
reissuance.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a reissuance of an exemption to 
the Land Disposal Restrictions, under the 1984 Hazardous and Solid 
Waste Amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, has 
been granted to TMCC for a Class I hazardous waste injection well 
located at their Corpus Christi, Texas facility. The company has 
adequately demonstrated to the satisfaction of the EPA by the petition 
reissuance application and supporting documentation that, to a 
reasonable degree of certainty, there will be no migration of hazardous 
constituents from the injection zone for as long as the waste remains 
hazardous. This final decision allows the underground injection by TMCC 
of the specific restricted hazardous wastes identified in this 
exemption reissuance request, into Class I hazardous waste injection 
well WDW-70 until December 31, 2028, unless the EPA moves to terminate 
this exemption. Additional conditions included in this final decision 
may be reviewed by contacting the EPA Region 6 Ground Water/UIC 
Section. A public notice was issued August 28, 2018, and the public 
comment period closed on October 15, 2018, and no comments were 
received. This decision constitutes final Agency action and there is no 
Administrative appeal.

DATES: This action is effective as of November 19, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition reissuance and all pertinent 
information relating thereto are on file at the following location:

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Water Division, Safe 
Drinking Water Branch (6WQ-S), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Dellinger, Chief Ground Water/
UIC Section, EPA--Region 6, telephone (214) 665-8324.

    Dated: November 19, 2018.
Charles W. Maguire,
Director, Water Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-27483 Filed 12-18-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
### §4219. Termination of authority

The authority of the Foundation under this part shall terminate on the date that is 10 years after the establishment of the Foundation, unless the Foundation is reauthorized by an Act of Congress.

(Pub. L. 116–224, title I, §119, Dec. 18, 2020, 134 Stat. 1080.)
§ 430.202 Coverage. ( a ) *Employees and agencies covered by statute.* ( 1 ) Section 4301(1) of title 5, United States Code, defines agencies covered by this subpart.
( 2 ) Section 4301(2) of title 5, United States Code, defines employees covered by statute by this subpart. Besides General Schedule (GS/GM) and prevailing rate employees, coverage includes, but is not limited to, senior-level and scientific and professional employees paid under 5 U.S.C. 5376.
( b ) *Statutory exclusions.* This subpart does not apply to agencies or employees excluded by 5 U.S.C. 4301(1) and (2), the United States Postal Service, or the Postal Rate Commission.
( c ) *Administrative exclusions.* OPM may exclude any position or group of positions in the excepted service under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 4301(2)(G). The regulations in this subpart exclude excepted service positions for which employment is not reasonably expected to exceed the minimum period established under § 430.207(a) in a consecutive 12-month period.
( d ) *Agency requests for exclusions.* Heads of agencies or their designees may request the Director of OPM to exclude positions in the excepted service. The request must be in writing, explaining why the exclusion would be in the interest of good administration.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk April 29, 2013

d0422 

# Order

April 29, 2013

146558

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 146558

COA: 303481

Oakland CC: 2003

- 192752

- FH;

MICHAEL DAVID VANCE, 2003

- 193604

- FC

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 29, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### § 6001.101 General.

In accordance with 5 CFR 2635.105, the regulations in this part apply to employees of the Department of Transportation and supplement the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch contained in 5 CFR part 2635. In addition to the standards in 5 CFR part 2635, employees are subject to the executive branch financial disclosure regulations contained in 5 CFR part 2634.
### §857–18. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated for purposes of carrying out sections 857–13 to 857–18 of this title not to exceed $520,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1978, $572,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1979, $565,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1980, $600,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1981, and $555,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1982. Such sums as may be appropriated under this section shall remain available until expended.

(Pub. L. 95–63, §8, July 5, 1977, 91 Stat. 267; Pub. L. 95–304, §1(2), June 29, 1978, 92 Stat. 347; Pub. L. 96–26, June 21, 1979, 93 Stat. 74; Pub. L. 97–87, §1(3), Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1134.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

Provisions similar to those contained in this section, which authorized appropriations, beginning with an authorization of $200,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1972, for the operation of the National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere as originally established on Aug. 16, 1971, were contained in section 857–12 of this title prior to repeal by section 7(a) of Pub. L. 95–63.

#### Amendments

1981—Pub. L. 97–87 inserted provisions authorizing appropriations of not to exceed $555,000 for fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 1982, and provided that such sums as might be appropriated under authority of this section remain available until expended.

1979—Pub. L. 96–26 substituted provisions authorizing appropriations of $565,000 for fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 1980, and $600,000 for fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 1981, for provisions directing that sums appropriated under this section remain available until expended.

1978—Pub. L. 95–304 inserted provisions authorizing appropriations for fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 1979.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 193

To amend section 922 of chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to 

protect the rights of citizens under the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 7, 2003

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

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To amend section 922 of chapter 44 of title 18, United 

States Code, to protect the rights of citizens under the 

Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United 

States.

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 ‘‘Second Amendment 

5 Rights Protection Act of 2003’’. 
2

•HR 193 IH 

1 SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS. 

2 Subsection (t) of section 922 of chapter 44 of title 

3 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting at the 

4 end thereof the following new paragraph: 

5 ‘‘(7) None of the funds appropriated pursuant 

6 to any provision of law may be used for (1) any sys7 tem to implement this subsection that does not re8 quire and result in the immediate destruction of all 

9 information, in any form whatsoever, submitted by 

10 or on behalf of any person who has been determined 

11 not to be prohibited from owning a firearm; (2) the 

12 implementation or collection of any tax or fee by any 

13 officer, agent, or employee of the United States, or 

14 by any state or local officer or agent acting on be15 half of the United States, in connection with the im16 plementation of this subsection; provided, that any 

17 person aggrieved by a violation of this provision may 

18 bring an action in the Federal district court for the 

19 district in which the person resides; provided fur20 ther, that any person who is successful with respect 

21 to any such action shall receive damages, punitive 

22 damages, and such other remedies as the court may 

23 determine to be appropriate, including a reasonable 

24 attorney’s fee.’’.

Æ
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 20

- 2921

_____________

LIFE CELEBRATION, INC.

, Appellant

v.

XEROX CORPORATION

______________

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(District Court No. 2: 18

- CV

- 02941 )

District Judge: Hon. Gene E.K. Pratter

Argued May 20 , 2021

Before: McKee, Restrepo

, Fuentes

, Circuit Judges

.

(Opinion filed: June 11, 2021 )

Joseph R. Podraza, Jr. [ARGUED]

William H. Trask

Lamb McErlane

One South Broad Street, Suite 1500

Philadelphia, PA 19107

Counsel for Appellant

Benjamin D. Hartwel l

Ward Greenberg Heller & Reidy

1835 Market Street, Suite 650

Philadelphia, PA 191032

Tony R. Sears [ARGUED]

Ward Greenberg Heller & Reidy

1800 Bausch & Lomb Place

Legacy Tower

Rochester, NY 14604

Counsel for Appellee

_______________________

OPINION *

_______________________

McKee, Circuit Judge

.

Life Celebration appeals the dismissal of its c laim that Xerox breached its dut y as

a landlord by fail ing to inspect and maintain the HVAC system and other environmental

controls in the space Life Celebration sub leased from Xerox. The district court held that

Life Celebration did not present evidence that Xerox owed the prerequisite duty and

granted summary judgment

. We agree and will affirm.

In a thorough and well

- reasoned Memorandum Opinion, the district court

explained why it grant ed summary judgment. 1 The court carefully considered and

rejected Life Celebration’s argument that Xerox owe d the asserted duty

. Life Celebration

failed to prov ide evidence from the Managed Service Agreement between it and Xerox or

present arguments based o n relevant principles of property law that this duty indeed

existed. W e can add little to elaborate on the district court ’s analysis and discussion.

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not

constitute binding precedent.

1 Life Celebration, Inc. v. Xerox Corp.

, No. 18

- 2941

, 2020 WL 5096945 (E.D P a Aug.

28, 2020).3

Accordingly, we will affirm the district court substantially for the reasons set forth in its

August 28, 2020 Memorandum and Order

.