alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NRC ANNOUNCES SELECTION OF NEW MEMBER OF THE 

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON MEDICAL USES OF ISOTOPES 

 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced the selection of 

John H. Suh, M.D., as one of the radiation oncologist representatives on the 

Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI). The 

ACMUI was established in 1958 and advises the NRC on policy and 

technical issues related to the regulation of the medical use of radioactive 

material. 

Dr. Suh received his bachelor’s and medical degrees from the University of Miami Miller 

School of Medicine in Miami, Fla. He completed his internship, residency and fellowship at the 

Cleveland Clinic in Ohio and joined the staff where he specialized in neuro-oncology and 

stereotactic radiosurgery and became the residency director in the Department of Radiation 

Oncology. 

 During his tenure with the Cleveland Clinic, Dr. Suh served as clinical director for the 

Department of Radiation Oncology, director of the Cleveland Clinic Gamma Knife Center, chair 

of the Department of Radiation Oncology at the Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, and 

associate director of the Gamma Knife Center at the Brain Tumor and Neuro-oncology Center at 

the Cleveland Clinic. He is board certified in radiation oncology and currently serves as the 

section head for the central nervous system/pediatric section for the American Board of 

Radiology’s oral board examination. 

Dr. Suh’s awards have included the National Brain Tumor Foundation Clinical Research 

Award, Teacher of the Year Award, and selection as one of America’s Top Physicians for 

Cancer. He was the principal investigator for two phase III trials testing a radiation sensitizer 

with whole brain radiation therapy for patients with brain metastases. 

Dr. Suh’s patient care, research and teaching interests include adult and pediatric brain 

tumors, Gamma Knife radiosurgery, and innovative radiation approaches. He has authored over 

120 publications and has served as the institutional principal investigator for the Radiation 

Therapy Oncology Group at the Cleveland Clinic since 1995. Dr. Suh has lectured extensively 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 10-092 May 25, 2010
locally, nationally and internationally. He serves as a reviewer for a number of medical journals 

and is a member of many professional societies. 

### 

News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.
Editorial Note on Subpart C of Part 9701
Editorial Note: At 73 FR 58435, Oct. 7, 2008, the application of subpart C to part 9701 was rescinded.

§ 9701.322 Setting and adjusting rate ranges. ( a ) Within its sole and exclusive discretion, DHS may, after coordination with OPM, set and adjust the rate ranges established under § 9701.321 on an annual basis. In determining the rate ranges, DHS and OPM may consider mission requirements, labor market conditions, availability of funds, pay adjustments received by employees of other Federal agencies, and any other relevant factors.
( b ) DHS may, after coordination with OPM, determine the effective date of newly set or adjusted band rate ranges. Unless DHS determines that a different effective date is needed for operational reasons, these adjustments will become effective on or about the date of the annual General Schedule pay adjustment authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5303.
( c ) DHS may establish different rate ranges and provide different rate range adjustments for different bands.
( d ) DHS may adjust the minimum and maximum rates of a band by different percentages.
### §8503. Notice of provisions of this subchapter

All persons having or bringing personal property on the premises of a Department facility shall be given reasonable notice of the provisions of this subchapter. In case of a mentally incompetent person, notice hereof shall be given the guardian or other person having custody or control of such person or, if none, to such person's nearest relative if known. The admission to or continued maintenance in such facility after reasonable notice of the provisions of this subchapter shall constitute consent to the provisions hereof. The death of any person on any such facility or the leaving of property thereon shall be prima facie evidence of a valid agreement for the disposition of such property in accordance with the provisions of this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 85–857, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1258, §5203; Pub. L. 99–576, title VII, §701(95), Oct. 28, 1986, 100 Stat. 3300; renumbered §8503, Pub. L. 102–40, title IV, §402(b)(1), May 7, 1991, 105 Stat. 238; Pub. L. 102–83, §4(a)(3), (4), Aug. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 404.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1991—Pub. L. 102–40 renumbered section 5203 of this title as this section.

Pub. L. 102–83 substituted "Department" for "Veterans' Administration".

1986—Pub. L. 99–576 substituted "such person's" for "his" in second sentence.
*District Judge of the Eastern District of Louisiana, sitting by designation. 

United States Court of Appeals,

Fifth Circuit.

No. 94-10236.

2225 NEW YORK AVENUE LTD., a Texas Limited Partnership by its General Partner GCJM,

Inc., a Texas Corp., Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

Henry CISNEROS, Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, et al.,

Defendants-Appellants.

Nov. 18, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

Before JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges, and DUPLANTIER,* District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

This appeal turns on the construction of 42 U.S.C. § 1437f(c)(2)(C), which states:

Adjustments in the maximum rents under subparagraphs (A) and (B) shall not result in

materialdifferences between the rents charged for assisted units and unassisted units ofsimilar

quality, type, and age in the same market area, as determined by the Secretary.

 * * * * * *

The Secretary may not reduce the contract rents in effect on or after April 15, 1987,

for newly constructed, substantially rehabilitated, or moderately rehabilitated projects assisted

under this section (including projects assisted under this section as in effect prior to

November 30, 1983), unless the project has been refinanced in a manner that reduces the

periodic payments of the owner.

Appellee 2225NewYork Avenue, Ltd., owns and operates an apartment complex that wasrenovated

for low-income housing pursuant to the Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program, a rent subsidy

programpromulgated byHUD. 42 U.S.C. § 1437f. Some years after HUD approved the contractual

arrangements by which appellee contracted to participate in this program, and notwithstanding the

above-quoted language, HUD attempted retroactivelyto "correct" the initialrents provided for in the

transaction. There's no contention that the project has been refinanced. The effect of this

"correction" would be to lower the rents appellee was permitted to charge its low-income tenants,

and thusto disadvantage appellee economically. The limited partnership filed suit for declaratory and
injunctive relief to halt the threatened rent rollback and prevailed before the district court. 842

F.Supp. 924.

On appeal, both parties assert arguments essentially identical to those weighed in two other

recent cases before courts of appeals. Both of those courts of appeals construed the above-quoted

statutory language to forbid the position that HUD has taken. Terrace Housing Associates Ltd. v.

Cisneros, 32 F.3d 461 (10thCir.1994); Foxglenn Investors Limited Partnership v. Cisneros, 35 F.3d

947 (1994). We agree with the analysis and conclusions of our sister circuits and adopt them as our

own. Further writing by this court would be pointless. For these reasons, the judgment of the trial

court is AFFIRMED.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 26, 2014

No. 04-13-00800-CV

Brenda PICKENS,

Appellant

v.

Thomas LEYTHAM, M.D.,

Appellee

From the 407th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013-CI-00666

Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

On March 12, 2014, Appellant Brenda Pickens filed a motion for rehearing and a motion 

for en banc reconsideration. See TEX. R. APP. P. 49.1, 49.7. The court requests Appellee

Thomas Leytham, M.D. to file a response to the motions. See id. R. 49.2. If Appellee chooses to 

file a response, Appellee must do so not later than April 25, 2014.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 26th day of March, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
[DO NO T PUBLISH]

IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 2- 12 23 7 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 0 :0 4- cr-6 00 38 -WPD-1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee,
ve rs us DELVIN MCKINNEY, a.k .a. Po oc hi e, a.k .a. Po co , ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t forth e So ut he rn Dis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (No ve m be r 8, 2 01 2) Befo re BARKETT, PRYOR an d B LACK, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM:

Case: 12-12237 Date Filed: 11/08/2012 Page: 1 of 3Delv in McKi nn ey ap pe al s pr o s e th e d is tri ctco ur t’s d en ia l o f hi s req ue st for a “ co m pl et e d ire ctrev ie w or e vi de nt ia ry he ari ng ” b as edon hi s co nt en ti on th athi s ap pe ll at e co un se l was no t p ro vi de d wi th a co m pl et e co py of h is tri al tra ns cri pt pr io r to hi s d ire ctap pe al . McKin ne y co nt en ds th e d is tri ctco urt ab us edit s di sc ret io n b y

de nyin g h is m ot io n b ecau se hi s ap pe ll at e co un se l n ev er re cei ve d t he tra ns cri pt of t he aft ern oo n s es si on on Feb ru ary 18 , 20 05 , andMcKi nn ey ha d a rig ht to a reco rdon ap pe al th atin cl ud eda co m pl et e tr an sc rip t o f th e tr ia l. The d is tri ctco ur t d idno t ab us e it s d is cret io n i n d en y in g M cKin ne y ’s
m ot io n. Even ass um in g s om e d ou bt reg ard in g wh ethe r McKi nn ey ’s cou ns el

1
rece iv eda fu ll co py of th e Feb ru ary 18 , 20 05 , tra ns cri pt , McKi nn ey ’s ess en ti al
co nt en ti on–t ha t h e was de ni edth e ri gh t t o e ffec ti ve ass is ta nc e o f ap pe ll at e co un se l be cau se of a n i nc om

pl et e rec or d– is on e th atm us t b e rai se d i n a§ 2 25 5 m ot io n. To th e ex te nt th atMcKi nn ey m ig ht see k t o ra is e su ch a cl ai m on co ll at eral rev ie w, he ha s p rev io us ly file d a28 U.S.C. § 2 25 5 m ot io n, wh ic h h as be en ad jud ic at edon it s
m eri ts . Se e McKi nn ey v. Un it ed St at es , S.D. Fla. Ca se No. 0 8- cv -6 03 00 . As McKi nn ey

ha s n ot so ug ht or o bt ai ne d a n o rd er fro m th is Co ur t au th or iz in g a

We reviewa district cour t’s denial of a

motion for evidentiar

y hearing f or an a buse of 1 discretion. United States v. Masse y , 89 F.3d 1433, 1443 ( 11th Cir. 1996).

2 Case: 12-12237 Date Filed: 11/08/2012 Page: 2 of 3se co ndor s uc ces si ve § 2 25 5 m ot io n, t he re was no reas on forth e d is tri ctco ur t t o

ho ldan ev id en ti ary he ari ng . AFFIRMED.

3 Case: 12-12237 Date Filed: 11/08/2012 Page: 3 of 3
### §5309. Payment of certain withheld benefits

(a) Any person who, but for section 5308 of this title, was entitled to benefits under any of the laws administered by the Secretary, whose award of benefits was terminated under such section, or whose benefits were not paid pursuant to sections 3329 and 3330 of title 31, and who was not guilty of mutiny, treason, sabotage, or rendering assistance to an enemy of the United States or its allies, shall be paid the full amount of any benefits not paid because of such section 5308, or withheld (including the amount of any checks covered on such person's account into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts together with any amount to such person's credit in the special-deposit account) pursuant to sections 3329 and 3330 of title 31. The Secretary shall certify to the Secretary of the Treasury the amounts of payments which, but for this section, would have been made from the special deposit account, and the Secretary of the Treasury, as directed by the Secretary, shall reimburse the appropriations of the Department from such special deposit account, or cover into the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts the amounts so certified.

(b) No payments shall be made for any period before the date claim therefor is filed under this section to any person whose award was terminated, or whose benefits were not paid, before July 1, 1954, because such person was a citizen or subject of Germany or Japan residing in Germany or Japan.

(Pub. L. 85–857, Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1232, §3109; Pub. L. 97–258, §3(k)(4), Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1065; Pub. L. 99–576, title VII, §701(75), Oct. 28, 1986, 100 Stat. 3297; renumbered §5309 and amended Pub. L. 102–40, title IV, §402(b)(1), (d)(1), May 7, 1991, 105 Stat. 238, 239; Pub. L. 102–83, §4(a)(1), (3), (4), (b)(1), (2)(E), Aug. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 403–405.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1991—Pub. L. 102–40, §402(b)(1), renumbered section 3109 of this title as this section.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 102–83, §4(b)(1), (2)(E), substituted "Secretary" for "Administrator" in two places in last sentence.

Pub. L. 102–83, §4(a)(3), (4), substituted "Department" for "Veterans' Administration" in last sentence.

Pub. L. 102–83, §4(a)(1), substituted "administered by the Secretary" for "administered by the Veterans' Administration" in first sentence.

Pub. L. 102–40, §402(d)(1), substituted "5308" for "3108" in two places in first sentence.

1986—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 99–576, §701(75)(A), substituted "such person's" for "his" in two places.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 99–576, §701(75)(B), substituted "such person" for "he".

1982—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 97–258 substituted "sections 3329 and 3330 of title 31" for "sections 123–128 of title 31" wherever appearing.
| 1. | Registration      Statements (Form S-8 No. 333-104426 and 333-59058) pertaining to Global      Sources Equity Compensation Plans Numbers I, II, III, IV, V, VI and VII of      Global Sources Ltd.; |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Registration      Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-138474) pertaining to Global Sources Equity      Compensation (2007) Master Plan and Global Sources Ltd. Directors Purchase      Plan (as of November 5, 2005); |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3. | Registration      Statement (Form F-3/A No. 333-114411) pertaining to the prospectus of      Global Sources Ltd.; and |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4. | Registration      Statement (Form F-3 No. 333-154960) pertaining to the prospectus of Global      Sources Ltd. |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### § 576.105 Existing Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment authorities.

As provided in section 1313(a)(3) of Public Law 107-296, any agency exercising Voluntary Separation Incentive authority in effect on January 24, 2003, may continue to offer Voluntary Separation Incentives consistent with that authority until that authority expires. An agency that is eligible to offer Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments under this authority and under any other statutory authority may choose which authority it wishes to use, or offer incentives under both.
#### Mary Spencer, Respondent, v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company, Appellant.

No opinion. Present — Close, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Taylor and Lewis, JJ.
#### § 25.45 Deposit in Treasury of United States.

All amounts collected pursuant to this part shall be deposited as miscellaneous receipts in the Treasury of the United States, except as provided in 31 U.S.C. 3806(g).
NRC SEEKS PUBLIC COMMENT ON DRAFT SAFETY CULTURE POLICY 

FOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES AND NUCLEAR MATERIAL USERS 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued for public comment a draft policy 

statement on “safety culture,” including the Commission’s expectation that any NRC-regulated 

organization will establish and maintain a positive safety culture. 

 The Commission addressed the safe conduct of nuclear power plant operations in a 1989 

policy statement and a safety-conscious work environment in a 1996 policy statement. After 

years of work in this area, and after the experience of incorporating aspects of safety culture into 

the Reactor Oversight Process effort, the Commission has approved issuing a draft policy 

statement that sets forth its expectation that all licensees and certificate holders establish and 

maintain a safety culture that protects public health and safety and the common defense and 

security. The draft policy defines safety culture as: “That assembly of characteristics, attitudes 

and behaviors in organizations and individuals which establishes that as an overriding priority, 

nuclear safety and security issues receive the attention warranted by their significance.” 

A safety culture should include a work environment where personnel feel free to raise 

safety and security concerns without fearing retaliation, as well as prompt and thorough 

identification, evaluation and resolution of those concerns. The NRC is strongly committed to 

promoting a positive safety culture among the organizations it regulates. 

The NRC is interested in the public’s comments in several areas, including: 

• Does the draft policy’s safety culture definition need further clarification? 

• What specific safety culture characteristics relevant to particular types of NRC 

licensees should the draft policy address? 

• What characteristics in the draft policy do not contribute to safety culture? 

• How can the NRC better involve stakeholders in addressing safety culture? 

Comments on the changes will be accepted until Feb. 4, 2010, following publication of 

the draft safety culture policy statement in the Federal Register, 

(http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/E9-26816.pdf). Comments may be mailed to: Alexander 

Sapountzis, Office of Enforcement, Mail Stop O4 A15A, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555-0001, or e-mailed to: alexander.sapountzis@nrc.gov. 

# # # 

News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 09-185 November 12, 2009
#### § 1500.61 Independent evaluation.

The Board shall authorize and fund an independent evaluation of the effectiveness of this Order and other programs conducted by the Board beginning five years after October 5, 2018, and every 3 years thereafter. The Board shall submit to the Secretary, and make available to the public, the results of each periodic independent evaluation conducted under this paragraph.
IN THE SUPREME COURT FO R THE STATE OF MONTANA
No. DA 21-0327 STATE OF MONTANA, Plaintiff and Appellee,

v. THOMAS JAMES LUCERO, Defendant and Appellant. ORDER Upon consideration of Defendant a nd Appellant’s Motion For Ext ension Of Time (Second Or Subsequent), a nd with good cause shown, Defenda nt and Appellant Thomas Lucero is here by granted an extension of time until July 1, 2022 in which to prepare, file and se rve Defendant and Appellant’s o pening brief.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 14 2022

06/14/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0327
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 23, 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”), Wild Bird Feeding Industry (“WBFI”) 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: Wild Bird Feeding Industry, Sioux Falls, SD. The nature and scope of WBFI's standards development activities are: Investigating and developing standards of identity and quality for products sold for wild birds. These products include feeders, houses, baths and accessories, and seed and other food.

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 04-25084  Filed 11-9-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M