alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 904.510 Return of seized property. ( a ) *Return.* In cases where NOAA, in its sole discretion, determines that forfeiture of seized property would not be in the best interest of the U.S. Government, NOAA will make a reasonable attempt to determine the party that the facts of record indicate has a predominant ownership interest in the seized property and, provided such a determination can be made, will arrange for return of the seized property to that party by appropriate means.
( b ) *Notice.* NOAA will serve a Notice of the Return of property as provided by § 904.3, to the owner, consignee, or other party the facts of record indicate has an interest in the seized property. The Notice will describe the seized property, state the time, place, and reason for the seizure and return, and will identify the owner or consignee, and if appropriate, the bailee of the seized property. The Notice of the return also will state that the party to whom the property is being returned is responsible for any distribution of the property to any party who holds a valid claim, right, title or interest in receiving the property, in whole or in part. The Notice also will provide that on presentation of the Notice and proper identification, and the signing of a receipt provided by NOAA, the seized property is authorized to be released.
§ 766.14 Interlocutory review of rulings. ( a ) At the request of a party, or on the judge's own initiative, the administrative law judge may certify to the Under Secretary for review a ruling that does not finally dispose of a proceeding, if the administrative law judge determines that immediate review may hasten or facilitate the final disposition of the matter.
( b ) Upon certification to the Under Secretary of the interlocutory ruling for review, the parties will have 10 days to file and serve briefs stating their positions, and five days to file and serve replies, following which the Under Secretary will decide the matter promptly.
* Pursuant to 5 TH 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .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 October 22, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-50290 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JUAN HORACIO VILLAREAL-SANTOS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. DR-02-CR-561-1-WWJ

-------------------- Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Juan Horacio Villareal-Santos appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Villareal contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) define separate offenses. He argues that the prior conviction that resulted in his increased sentence is an element of a separate offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) that should have been alleged in his indictment. Villareal maintains that he pleadedNo. 03-50290 -2- guilty to an indictment which charged only simple reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He argues that his sentence exceeds the two-year maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for that offense.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Villareal acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
#### In the Matter of Deneene Washington, Appellant, v Vic Washington, Respondent.

[820 NYS2d 812]

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Queens County (S. Módica, J.), dated October 19, 2005, which, after a hearing, dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The determination as to whether a respondent has committed acts constituting a cognizable family offense *(see*Family Ct Act § 832) is a factual issue for the Family Court to resolve *(see Matter of King v Flowers,*13 AD3d 629 [2004]), and that determination is entitled to great weight on appeal unless clearly unsupported by the record *(see Matter of Bongiorno v Bongiorno,*1 AD3d 511 [2003]). Here, the Family Court properly dismissed the petition upon finding that the petitioner failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent committed such acts upon determining that the respondent’s use of physical force against the petitioner was justified *(see*Penal Law § 35.15). We find no basis to disturb that determination. Miller, J.P., Luciano, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Region III

2443 Warrenville Road

Lisle IL 60532

Web site: www.nrc.gov

No. III-02-031

Contact: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 

 Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

May 29, 2002

E-Mail: OPA3.RegionIII@nrc.gov 

NRC CHAIRMAN'S VISIT TO FERMI 2 NUCLEAR PLANT ON MAY 30 POSTPONED

Richard A. Meserve, Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, was 

scheduled to visit the Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant on May 30. The trip has been postponed until 

later this year.

###
# L_2020277EN.01000201.xml

| 26.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 277/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 277/2

---

Information concerning the entry into force of the Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the State of Israel, of the other part

The Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Government of the State of Israel, of the other part, signed in Brussels on 10 June 2013, entered into force on 2 August 2020, in accordance with Article 30(2) of the Agreement, as the last notification was deposited on 2 July 2020.

---
Exhibit
32.2
 **CERTIFICATION**
 Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
 as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Brand Intermediate Holdings, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony
A. Rabb, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:
 
 1.
    The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
  2.
    The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.
  
   
 Date:  May 11, 2005
    By:
    /s/  Anthony A.
  RabbChief
      Financial Officer and Vice President,
Finance
 
 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 Commission or its staff upon request.
NRC ISSUES NATIONAL REPORT FOR CONVENTION

ON NUCLEAR SAFETY’S FUKUSHIMA MEETING

 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a report on the safety of U.S. nuclear 

power plants to be considered at the Convention on Nuclear Safety’s meeting later this month. 

This report discusses the actions taken by the United States to improve nuclear safety in response 

to the March 11, 2011, accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan.

In particular, “The United States of America National Report for the 2012 Convention on 

Nuclear Safety Extraordinary Meeting” describes how the United States addressed six topics in 

relation to the Fukushima accident: external events, design issues, severe accident management 

and recovery, national organizations, emergency preparedness and response and post-accident 

management, and international cooperation. Because license holders are responsible for the 

safety of U.S. nuclear power plants, the report includes a section developed by the Institute of 

Nuclear Power Operations describing the U.S. nuclear industry’s response to the Fukushima 

accident.

The report will add to the knowledge base for parties to the Convention on lessons 

learned and actions taken following the Fukushima accident. The Convention on Nuclear Safety 

Extraordinary Meeting will be held Aug. 27-31 at the International Atomic Energy Agency in 

Vienna, Austria.

Copies of “The United States of America National Report for the 2012 Convention on 

Nuclear Safety Extraordinary Meeting” will be available for public inspection in the NRC Public 

Document Room at NRC headquarters, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Md.; or through the NRC’s website. 

###

NOTE: Anyone wishing to take photos or use a camera to record any portion of a NRC meeting should 

contact the Office of Public Affairs beforehand.

News releases are available through a free Listserv subscription or by clicking on the EMAIL UPDATES 

link on the NRC homepage (www.nrc.gov). E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are 

posted to NRC's website. For the latest news, follow the NRC on www.twitter.com/NRCgov.

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: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov

No. 12-092 August 10, 2012
### §3314. Baby changing facilities in restrooms

(a) Additional Requirement for the Construction, Alteration, and Acquisition of Public Buildings.—Except as provided in subsection (b) and subject to any reasonable accommodations that may be made for individuals in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) restrooms in a public building shall be equipped with baby changing facilities that the Administrator determines are physically safe, sanitary, and appropriate.

(b) Exceptions.—The requirement under subsection (a) shall not apply—

(1) to a restroom in a public building that is not available or accessible for public use;

(2) to a restroom in a public building that contains clear and conspicuous signage indicating where a restroom with a baby changing table is located on the same floor of such public building;

(3) if new construction would be required to install a baby changing facility in the public building and the cost of such construction is unfeasible; or

(4) to a building not subject to an alteration as set forth in section 3307.

(c) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) Baby changing facility.—The term "baby changing facility" means a table or other device suitable for changing the diaper of a child age 3 or under.

(2) Pubic 1 building.—The term "public building" means a public building as defined in section 3301 and controlled by the Public Building Service of the General Services Administration.

(Added Pub. L. 114–235, §2(a)(2), Oct. 7, 2016, 130 Stat. 964.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Americans with Disabilities Act, referred to in subsec. (a), probably means the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101–336, July 26, 1990, 104 Stat. 327, which is classified principally to chapter 126 (§12101 et seq.) of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 12101 of Title 42 and Tables.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 3314 was renumbered section 3315 of this title.

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

#### Applicability

Pub. L. 114–235, §2(c), Oct. 7, 2016, 130 Stat. 965, provided that: "The requirement under section 3314(a) of title 40, United States Code, shall apply in the case of a public building constructed, altered, or acquired by the Administrator of General Services on or after the date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Oct. 7, 2016], beginning on that date."

1  So in original. Probably should be " Public ".
The Safe Level of Fossil Carbon Emissions? Zero! 

By 

Wilfred Candler 

February, 2014 

"I challenge the EPA in reporting in Carbon 

Pollution from New Power Plsnts, to say what it 

believes the safe level of atmospheric Carbon 

Dioxide to be." 

First the good news: We are not short of energy. 

"Climate Forcing" is positive meaning that Earth receives 

(slightly) more radiant energy, than it emits into space. 

Some bad news: This imbalance causes Earth to become 

(slightly) warmer year after year. 

Causation: The imbalance is caused by our use of fossil 

fuels (coal, natural gas and oil) that add carbon dioxide 

(CO2) to the atmosphere, thus blocking some of the infrared radiation that would otherwise send energy into space: 

This property of gaseous CO2 has been known to physicists 

since 1859, when it was discovered by John Tyndall. 

Our use of fossil fuels adds about 2 ppm (part per 

million) of CO2 to the atmosphere each year. Currently we 

are at about 400 ppm. For 800,000 years prior to tbe use 

of fossil fuels (starting in say 1750), atmospheric CO2 had 

never been above 300 ppm, as shown in the ice-core data 

(see next page),we have had 800 thousand years experience 

with atmospheric CO2 at or below 300 ppm. 

Currently we are at 400 ppm, but there is no reason to 

believe t,tiat this i.s safe. There are vicious fast and slow 

feed-back mechanisms that add to the direct effect of CO2. 

For instance as the Earth warms there is less polar ice, 

which means that less of the incoming radiation from the 

sun is reflected back into space; instead the open water 

absorbs the radiation leading to faster warming. (The 

first ice-free day in the arctic is expected in 2016.) The 

most threatening feed-back mechanism is from methane as 
m1 

30 

E 7M 

n 

U 

3" 

fM 

ice Core Data 

Antarctic Ice Core Data 1 

~law~ yrMr~ vriMwn -007 CentuiuMw. 

I i i i S i I I 

Years BP 

arctic permafrost melts and decays anaerobically; and from 

methane currently sequestered in the form of "methane 

clathrate" (a combination of ice and methane, which may be 

released as atmospheric methane as the.ice melts). 

Depending on the strength of these feed-back mechanisms, 

the Earth might continue to warm even if we stopped using 

fossil fuels. These fast and slow feed-backs are so 

strong, that it is estimated that only 150 of the warming 

effect of added CO2 comes from the direct insulating effect 

discovered by John Tyndale, the other 85% comes from slow 

and fast feed-backs some of which take decades to fully 

work themselves out. (see http://www.apollo-gaia.org/ ... on 

the web. 

I challenge the EPA in reporting in Carbon 

Pollution from New Power Plants, to say what it 

believes the safe level of atmospheric Carbon 

Dioxide to be. 

Wilfred Candler, Ph.D., D.Sc. 410-757-5626 

1514 Winchester Rd, 

Annapolis, MD, 21401 wcandlerl@gmail.com 

~ 

~ U 

Z 

0 

~ 

rN
### §22109. Liability for acts of officers and agents

The corporation is liable for the acts of its officers and agents acting within the scope of their authority.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1301.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 22109 | 36:346 (1st sentence). | Sept. 20, 1950, ch. 958, §6 (1st sentence), 64 Stat. 871. |

Section

The words "acting within the scope of their authority" are added for clarity and consistency in the revised title.
#### Francis T. Tehan, Appellant-Respondent, v. Dorothy H. Tehan, Respondent-Appellant.

Orders affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. All concur. (Appeal by plaintiff from two orders which (1) directed plaintiff to serve a bill of particulars, and (2) directed plaintiff to pay to defendant’s attorneys $250 counsel fees; also appeal by defendant from order which settled the issues for trial by jury.) Present — Taylor, P. J., Harris, MeCurn, Larkin and Love, JJ.
Exhibit 31.1

                                CERTIFICATION
          Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


I, Gerry Jardine, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of New Pacific
    Ventures, Inc.

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

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

4.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
    establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
    in Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
    amended) for the registrant and have:

    a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
    information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
    subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
    particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being
    prepared;

    b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
    procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
    quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

    c) presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the
    effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
    evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
    our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
    committee of the registrant's board of directors:

    a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
    controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
    process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
    registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

    b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
    employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;
    and

6.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
    quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
    controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal
    controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including
    any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material
    weaknesses.

Dated:  September 10, 2004

/s/Gerry Jardine
----------------
Gerry Jardine
President/Director
#### § 1400.6 Construction.

Nothing in this regulation shall be construed as subjecting any functions vested in, or assigned pursuant to law to any Federal department or agency or head thereof to the authority of any other agency or office exclusively, or as abrogating or restricting such functions in any manner.
Exhibit 10.1





FIRST AMENDMENT TO
 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
 
 This First Amendment (the "Amendment") to the Employment Agreement referenced below by and between Vibe Records Inc. Nevada (the "Company"), and Timothy J. Olphie, an executive (the "Executive") (together the "Parties") is made and entered into effective as of August 2, 2010 (the "Effective Date").
 
 WHEREAS, the Parties had entered into an Employment Agreement on January 26, 2009 (the "Original Agreement"); and
 
 WHEREAS, the Parties now wish to amend the Original Agreement to make such changes as are specifically covered herein.
 
 NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions herein set forth, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:
 1. Section 4(a) is hereby deleted and revised to read in its entirety as follows:
 Base Salary. The Company will pay salary to Executive at an annual rate of $125,000, in accordance with its regular payroll practices.  The Board will review Executive’s salary at least annually.  The Board, acting in its discretion, may increase (but may not decrease) the annual rate of Executive’s salary in effect at any time.
 
 2. Except as set forth in this Amendment, the Original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and references in the Original Agreement to "this Agreement", "hereunder", "herein", "hereof", and words of like effect shall mean the Original Agreement as so amended by this Amendment.
 3. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts and/or by facsimile, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which signed counterparts, taken together, shall constitute one instrument.
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment as of the Effective Date referenced above.
 VIBE RECORDS, INC. NEVADABy: __________________________Director/s/ Timothy J. OlphieTimothy J. Olphie
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3378 Engrossed in House (EH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3378

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 220 Elm Avenue in Munising, Michigan, as the ``Elizabeth L. Kinnunen 
                        Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. ELIZABETH L. KINNUNEN POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 220 Elm Avenue in Munising, Michigan, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Elizabeth L. Kinnunen Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Elizabeth 
L. Kinnunen Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 20, 2012.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
112th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 3378

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 220 Elm Avenue in Munising, Michigan, as the ``Elizabeth L. Kinnunen 
                        Post Office Building''.
```
### Part C—Performance