alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Tehama County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Red Bluff, California. Agenda items to be covered include: (1) Introductions, (2) Approval of Minutes, (3) Public Comment, (4) Selection of New Chairman, (5) New Members Welcome, (6) Review of Walk in the Woods Project, (7) General Discussion, (8) Next Agenda.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on December 9, 2004 from 9 a.m. and end at approximately 12 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Lincoln Street School, Conference Room A, 1135 Lincoln Street, Red Bluff, CA. Individuals wishing to speak or propose agenda items must send their names and proposals to Jim Giachino, DFO, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95988.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Bobbin Gaddini, Committee Coordinator, USDA, Mendocino National Forest, Grindstone Ranger District, P.O. Box 164, Elk Creek, CA 95939. (530) 968-5329; e-mail                         *ggaddini@fs.fed.us.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting is open to the public. Committee discussion is limited to Forest Service staff and Committee members. However, persons who wish to bring matters to the attention of the Committee may file written statements with the Committee staff before or after the meeting. Public input sessions will be provided and individuals who made written requests by December 5, 2004 will have the opportunity to address the committee at those sessions.

Dated: November 12, 2004.

James F. Giachino,

Designated Federal Official.

[FR Doc. 04-25604 Filed 11-17-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
#### § 719.16 Extension of time.

The parties may extend any applicable time limitation by stipulation filed with the ALJ before the time limitation expires, or the ALJ may, on the ALJ's own initiative or upon application by any party, either before or after the expiration of any applicable time limitation, extend the time , except that the requirement that a hearing be demanded within 15 days, and the requirement that a final agency decision be made within 30 days, may not be modified.
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19

- 1431 V

UNPUBLISHED

KATHERINE D. WHAM

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: September 18, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Guillain

- Barre Syndrome (GBS)

Patrick J. Sullivan, Sullivan Law Firm, LLC, Seattle , WA , for petitioner.

Dhairya Divyakant Jani , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On September 18, 2019

, Katherine Wham filed a petition for compensation under

the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. 2 (the

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered Guillain

- Barre Synd rome as a result

of an influenza vaccine administered on November 5, 2018 . Petit ion at 1 . The case was

assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On September 11, 2020

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he

concedes that P etitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c)

Report at 1. Specifically, R espondent stated it is his position that Pe titioner has satisfied

the criteria sets forth in the Vaccine Injury Table and the Qualifications and Aids to

Interpretation

. Id. at 5 . Respondent further recommends entitlement in this case

. Id. at 1.

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required

to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

- Government Act

of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government

Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance

with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information,

the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that

the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease

of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa

(2012 ).2 In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
#### In the Matter of Kadiatou B., an Infant. Fatamatou N.-B. et al., Respondents; Administration for Children’s Services, Appellant.

[820 NYS2d 515]

Appeal from order, Family Court, Bronx County (Clark V Richardson, J.), entered on or about March 7, 2005, deemed withdrawn. Preliminary appellate injunction granted, as indicated. No opinion. Order filed. Concur — Saxe, J.E, Gonzalez, Catterson, McGuire and Malone, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 212 (Wednesday, November 3, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 64039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24471]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Defense Science Board

AGENCY: Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee Meeting Cancellations.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Science Board Task Force on Identification 
Technologies of the Future meeting scheduled for November 4-5, 2004, 
has been canceled.

    Dated: October 28, 2004.
Jeannette Owings-Ballard,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 04-24471 Filed 11-2-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
#### John Frederick VEELEY, Movant, v. COMMONWEALTH, Opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

January 27, 1948.

Richard F. Lynch for movant.

Eldon S. Dummit, Attorney General, opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal denied; Judgment affirmed.
Order entered June 26, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00758-CV

JARI'L ROBINSON, ET AL., Appellants

V.

PACE HOMES, Appellee

On Appeal from the 95th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-13-13967-D

ORDER

We GRANT appellant’s June 17, 2015 motion for an extension of time to file a notice of 

appeal. The notice of appeal filed on June 17, 2015 is deemed timely for jurisdictional purposes.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
O.M.B. No. 2070-0012 Approval Expires 10/31/96

I Agency Use Date of Receipt I ~ FUIR U.S. Environmental Protection Agency I

NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT oF I

I~#~ri~MANUFACTURE OR IMPORT(4OCFR~l2O.lO2) I

Part I- SUBMflTER IDENTIFICATION I

Manufacturer/ Name ofAuthorized Official Mailing Address (number and street)

Importer

(in U.S.)

Company Name City, State, ZIP code

Technical

Contact

(in U.S.) Name Telephone Number

Part II - Premanufacture Notice (PMN) “P” Case Number:

Part III - Check the appropriate box and provide the exact date of manufacture or importation:

U First Commercial Manufacture** El First Commercial lmportation***

date: date:

Date of commencement is the date of completion of non-exempt manufacture of the first amount(batch, drum, etc.)

~Forimporters, the date of commencement is the date that the new chemical substance clears U.S. customs.

Part IV - Manufacturing Plant Site(s) or Importing Site(s): (Importers, provide street address of destination)

1CBr

Part V - Specific Chemical Identity: (For Consolidatedsubmissions, each substance must have a separate NOC form

withthe specific identity of each chemical substance.)

ICBI

Part VI - Generic Chemical Name (if chemical identity is claimed CBI*)

Part VII - Substance identity Confidentiality Status: -

I wish to continue to claim the substance identity confidential and the substantiation tosupport this claim is attached.

Failure to submitthe required substantiation in accordance with 40 CFR 720.85(b) will result in a waiverof your claim.

I previously claimed the substance identity as confidential and hereby relinquish that claim.

EJ I did not claim the substance identity as confidential in my original PMN submission.

You must submit your completed notice no later than 30 calendar days after the first date of commercial manufacture/importation

tothe address shown below:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

OPPT Document Control Office (7407M)

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, D.C. 20460

ATTN: Notice of Commencement

Signature of authorized official Date

Note: CBI - refers to theterm ~Confidential Business Information”. Mark (X) in the box if the information is to be held Confidential.

EPA Form 7710-56 (8-95)
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-08-0005 - Results of Material Control and Accounting Baseline Inspections Conducted at Nuclear Power Reactors and Wet Storage Sites

Accession Number: ML080520166

Date Released: Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML080570144 - SECY-08-0005-Results of Material Control and Accounting Baseline Inspections Conducted at Nuclear Power Reactors and Wet Storage Sites (5 page(s), 1/8/2008)
    - ML080570167 - SECY-08-0005-Enclosure: Material Control and Accounting at Nuclear Power Reactors and Wet Storage Sites (Includes Attachments 1 & 2) (12 page(s), 1/8/2008)
    - ML080570177 - SECY-08-0005-Enclosure (Attachment 3): TI 2515/154 Inspection Findings (6 page(s), 1/8/2008)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
**Exhibit
      32.1**








**CERTIFICATIONS
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADDED BY**


**SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report
      of East Penn Financial Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period
      ending June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
      (the
“Report”), I, **Brent L. Peters**, Chairman of the Board, President
      and Chief Executive 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:





·
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and
                15(d) of
                the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934;
                and





·
            To
                my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
                in
                all material respects, the Company’s consolidated financial condition and
                results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
                periods
                presented in the Report.











/s/
      Brent L.
      Peters


**Brent
      L. Peters**, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive
      Officer





Dated:   August
      14, 2007


Page
      33
### §6308. Contracts for transportation of Federal Government securities

When practicable, a contract for transporting bullion, cash, or securities of the Federal Government shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder after notice to all parties with means of transportation.

(Pub. L. 111–350, §3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3806.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 6308 | 41:24. | July 7, 1884, ch. 332, (words after "fifty five thousand dollars" in 3d par. under heading "Miscellaneous Objects Under the Treasury Department"), 23 Stat. 204. |

Section

The words "bullion, cash, or securities of the Federal Government" are substituted for "moneys, bullion, coin, notes, bonds, and other securities of the United States, and paper" to eliminate unnecessary words. The word "awarded" is substituted for "let" to use more modern terminology.
#### Nancy Piccarreto, as Administratrix of the Estate of Joseph Piccarreto, Deceased, Respondent, v. Rochester General Hospital, Appellant.

Memorandum: The admission of the conversation between decedent’s brother and Dr. Parnall and the receipt in evidence as a part of the conversation of the note written by the coroner to the John Hancock Insurance Company over defendant’s objection constituted prejudicial error. Dr. Parnall was not a party to the action and his statements made several weeks after the decedent’s death were not a part of the *res gestae.*The negligent acts charged against defendant had terminated and no transaction in respect thereto was pending at the time. (See *Luby*v. *Hudson Riv. R. R. Co., 17*N. Y. 131; *Anderson*v. *Rome, W. & O. R. R. Co.,*54 N. Y. 334, 340; Richardson on Evidence [6th ed.], § 391.) As to the note, if the conversation was improperly received in evidence, it would seem to follow that it was prejudicial error to admit in evidence as a part of the conversation the note written *626by the coroner, and if not admissible on that ground, it was inadmissible under the hearsay rule. (Richardson on Evidence [6th ed.], § 240.) We are also of the opinion that the notation made by an interne in the hospital record which read: *“*Impression. 1. In view of recent past unpleasant experiences, tetanus must be kept foremost in mind ” should not have been received in evidence over defendant’s objection. All concur. (Appeal from a judgment for plaintiff in a negligence action. The order denied a motion to set aside the verdict.) Present — Taylor, P. J., McCurn, Vaughan, Kimball and Piper, J J. [See *post,*p. 713.]
§ 287.3 Responsibilities of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. ( a ) Coordinate issues related to agency conformity assessment program development, use, and implementation and issue guidance, training material, and other material to assist Federal agencies in understanding and applying conformity assessment to meet their requirements. Material is available at *https://www.standards.gov .*
( b ) Chair the Interagency Committee on Standards Policy (ICSP); encourage participation in the ICSP; as well as provide resource support to the ICSP and its working groups related to conformity assessment issues, as needed.
( c ) Work with agencies through the ICSP and other means to coordinate Federal, State, and local conformity assessment activities with private sector conformity assessment activities.
( d ) Participate in the development of voluntary consensus standards, recommendations, and guidelines related to conformity assessment to ensure that Federal viewpoints are represented.
( e ) Increase awareness of the importance of public and private sector conformity assessment through development and publication of conformity assessment resources. Material is available at *https://www.standards.gov .*
( f ) To the extent that resources are available and upon request by a state government agency, work with that state agency to reduce duplication and complexity in state conformity assessment activities.
( g ) Review, within five years from October 29, 2020, the effectiveness of the guidance in this part and recommend modifications to the Secretary as needed.
exv4w4



 










EXHIBIT 4.4




Amendment No. 2 to

HEI, Inc. 1998 Stock Option Plan

(Effective as of February 11, 2004)



Section 3(a) of the HEI, Inc. 1998 Stock Option Plan is amended in its entirety
to read as follows:



     (a) Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 9 of this Plan, the
number of Common Shares which may be (i) issued or transferred upon the
exercise of Option Rights or Appreciation Rights, or (ii) awarded as Restricted
Shares and released from substantial risk of forfeiture thereof or Deferred
Shares, shall not in the aggregate exceed 1,650,000 Common Shares, which may be
Common Shares of original issuance or Common Shares held in treasury or a
combination thereof. For the purposes of this Section 3(a):



     (i) Upon payment in cash of the benefit provided by any award granted
under this Plan, any Common Shares that were covered by that award shall again
be available for issuance or transfer hereunder; and



     (ii) Upon the full or partial payment of any Option Price by the transfer
to the Company of Common Shares or upon satisfaction of tax withholding
obligations in connection with any such exercise or any other payment made or
benefit realized under this Plan by the transfer or relinquishment of Common
Shares, there shall be deemed to have been issued or transferred under this
Plan only the net number of Common Shares actually issued or transferred by the
Company less the number of Common Shares so transferred or relinquished.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7328

TYRONE LAMAR ROBERSON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

A.J. PADULA, Warden; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney

General of the State of South Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Anderson. Cameron McGowan Currie, District

Judge. (8:06-cv-01247-CMC)

Submitted: December 14, 2006 Decided: December 20, 2006

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tyrone Lamar Roberson, Appellant Pro Se

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Tyrone Lamar Roberson seeks to appeal the district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000)

petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court

is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Roberson has

not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate

of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
### §413. Postal services at diplomatic posts

(a) The Postal Service and the Department of State may enter into 1 or more agreements for field testing to ascertain the feasibility of providing postal services through personnel provided by the Department of State at branch post offices established by the Postal Service in United States diplomatic missions at locations abroad for which branch post offices are not established under section 406.

(b) To the extent that the Postal Service and the Department of State conclude it to be feasible and in the public interest, the Postal Service may establish branch post offices at United States diplomatic missions in locations abroad for which branch post offices are not established under section 406, and the Department of State may enter into an agreement with the Postal Service to perform postal services at such branch post offices through personnel designated by the Department of State.

(c) The Department of State shall reimburse the Postal Service for any amounts, determined by the Postal Service, equal to the additional costs incurred by the Postal Service, including transportation costs, incurred by the Postal Service in the performance of its obligations under any agreement entered into under this section.

(d) Each agreement entered into under this section shall include—

(1) provisions under which the Department of State shall make any reimbursements required under subsection (c);

(2) provisions authorizing the Postal Service to terminate the agreement, and the services provided thereunder, in the event that the Department of State does not comply with the provisions under paragraph (1); and

(3) any other provisions which may be necessary, including provisions relating to the closing of a post office under this section if necessary because a post office under section 406 is established in the same location.

(Added Pub. L. 101–524, §5(a), Nov. 6, 1990, 104 Stat. 2303.)
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2510

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

2000 Allston Way in Berkeley, California, as the ‘‘Maudelle Shirek Post 

Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 18, 2003

Ms. LEE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Government Reform 

A BILL

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 2000 Allston Way in Berkeley, California, 

as the ‘‘Maudelle Shirek Post Office Building’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. MAUDELLE SHIREK POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 2000 Allston Way in Berkeley, 

6 California, shall be known and designated as the 

7 ‘‘Maudelle Shirek Post Office Building’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 
2

•HR 2510 IH 

1 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

2 be deemed to be a reference to the Maudelle Shirek Post 

3 Office Building.

Æ
§ 700.70 General provisions. ( a ) Compliance actions may be taken for any reason necessary or appropriate to the enforcement or the administration of the Defense Production Act, the Selective Service Act and related statutes, this part, or an official action. Such actions include audits, investigations, or other inquiries.
( b ) Willful violation of any of the provisions of Title I or section 705 of the Defense Production Act, this part, or an official action of the Department of Commerce, is a criminal act, punishable as provided in sections 103 and 705 of the Defense Production Act.
[49 FR 30414, July 30, 1984. Redesignated at 54 FR 601, Jan. 9, 1989, as amended at 63 FR 31924, June 11, 1998; 79 FR 47570, Aug. 14, 2014; 89 FR 58976, July 22, 2024]