alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 15 (Thursday, January 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 3875]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-01332]

[[Page 3875]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

President's Committee on the International Labor Organization 
Charter Renewal

AGENCY: Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Labor.

ACTION: Notice of charter renewal.

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

SUMMARY: On September 30, 2013, President Obama continued the 
President's Committee on the International Labor Organization (ILO) for 
two years through September 30, 2015 (E.O. 13652, 78 FR 61817 
(September 30, 2013)). In response, and pursuant to the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 2), the 
Secretary of Labor approved on January 14, 2014, renewal of the 
committee's charter.
    Purpose: The President's Committee on the International Labor 
Organization was established in 1980 by Executive Order 12216 to 
monitor and assess the work of the ILO and make recommendations to the 
President regarding United States policy towards the ILO. The committee 
is chaired by the Secretary of Labor and the Department of Labor's 
Bureau of International Labor Affairs is responsible for providing the 
necessary support for the committee.
    The committee is comprised of seven members: The Secretary of Labor 
(chair), the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Commerce, the 
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the Assistant 
to the President for Economic Policy, and one representative each from 
organized labor and the business community, designated by the 
Secretary. The labor and business members are the presidents of the 
most representative organizations of U.S. workers and employers engaged 
in ILO matters.

    Authority: The authority for this notice is granted by the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2) and Executive Order 
No. 13652 of September 20, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert B. Shepard, Director, Office of 
International Relations, Bureau of International Labor Affairs, U.S. 
Department of Labor, telephone (202) 693-4808.

    Signed at Washington, DC, on January 16, 2014.
Carol Pier,
Deputy Undersecretary, Bureau of International Labor Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2014-01332 Filed 1-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-28-P
```
#### Mary A. Davis, as Administratrix of the Estate of Daniel E. Davis, Deceased, Appellant, v. Poirier & McLane Corporation, Respondent.

No opinion. Present—Close, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Lewis, JJ.
### §8132. Declaration of purpose

The purpose of this subchapter is to assist the States to construct State home facilities (or to acquire facilities to be used as State home facilities) for furnishing domiciliary or nursing home care to veterans, and to expand, remodel, or alter existing buildings for furnishing domiciliary, nursing home, adult day health, or hospital care to veterans in State homes.

(Added Pub. L. 88–450, §4(a), Aug. 19, 1964, 78 Stat. 501, §5032; amended Pub. L. 94–581, title II, §206(b), Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2859; Pub. L. 95–62, §3(3), July 5, 1977, 91 Stat. 262; Pub. L. 98–528, title I, §105(1), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2689; renumbered §8132, Pub. L. 102–40, title IV, §402(b)(1), May 7, 1991, 105 Stat. 238; Pub. L. 104–262, title III, §342(b)(2), Oct. 9, 1996, 110 Stat. 3206; Pub. L. 116–315, title III, §3004(c)(2), Jan. 5, 2021, 134 Stat. 4992.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2021—Pub. L. 116–315 struck out "several" before "States".

1996—Pub. L. 104–262 inserted "adult day health," before "or hospital care".

1991—Pub. L. 102–40 renumbered section 5032 of this title as this section.

1984—Pub. L. 98–528 inserted "(or to acquire facilities to be used as State home facilities) after "State home facilities".

1977—Pub. L. 95–62 inserted references to the construction of State home facilities for furnishing of domiciliary care and to the expansion, remodeling, and alteration of existing buildings for furnishing domiciliary, nursing home, or hospital care to veterans in State homes.

1976—Pub. L. 94–581 substituted "veterans" for "war veterans".

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

#### Effective Date of 1977 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 95–62 effective Oct. 1, 1977, with provision for the continuing force and effect of the terms and conditions of grants made prior to Oct. 1, 1977, under former section 644 of this title and with additional provision for the modification of the terms and conditions of both grants made under former section 644 of this title prior to Oct. 1, 1977, and of grants made under this subchapter prior to Oct. 1, 1977, see section 5 of Pub. L. 95–62, set out as a note under section 8131 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1976 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 94–581 effective Oct. 21, 1976, see section 211 of Pub. L. 94–581, set out as a note under section 111 of this title.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-7359
RASHID QAWI AL-AMIN, a/k/a Donald T. Jones, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus G. DEEDS; M. SPRADLING; D. CROWELL; Y. ELSWICK, Defendants - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (CA-96-648-R) Submitted: August 14, 1997 Decided: August 20, 1997 Before NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rashid Qawi Al-Amin, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant, a Virginia inmate, app eals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915A(b)(1) (West Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find that this appeal is frivolous. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Al-Amin v. Deeds , No. CA-96-648-R (W.D. VA. Aug. 13, 1996). 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
NRC ISSUES FINAL SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT AND FINAL DESIGN 

APPROVAL FOR GE-HITACHI ESBWR ADVANCED REACTOR 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued a final safety evaluation report 

(FSER) and final design approval for GE-Hitachi’s Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor 

(ESBWR). The approval, which indicates the NRC finds the design technically acceptable but 

does not fully certify the design, is good for 15 years.

NRC staff has spent approximately five years carefully considering whether to certify the 

reactor. The ESBWR is designed to produce approximately 1,500 megawatts of electricity and it 

features enhanced systems to safely shut down the reactor or mitigate the effects of an accident.

Separately, the NRC is considering GE-Hitachi’s request to certify the design through 

rulemaking. The Commission is currently considering the NRC’s staff’s request to publish that 

proposed rule.

“Our technical experts have asked tough questions to ensure GE-Hitachi has 

appropriately addressed the NRC’s requirements, and after their extensive technical evaluation 

they’re satisfied with the ESBWR design,” said Michael Johnson, director of NRC’s Office of 

New Reactors. “If the Commission agrees with the staff, we’ll move on to fully certifying the 

design, incorporating it into our regulations using a rule-making process that includes a public 

comment period.”

Neither a final design approval nor design certification grant permission to build or 

operate a reactor. Full certification, if granted by the Commission following the staff’s 

recommendation, is valid for 15 years and allows a utility to reference the design when applying 

for a Combined License to build and operate a nuclear power plant. NRC has long sought 

standardization of nuclear power plant designs to help enhance safety and bring efficiency to the 

reactor licensing process.

The NRC has certified four other designs: the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor 

(ABWR), System 80+, AP600 and AP1000. The agency has issued proposed rules to certify 

revised versions of the ABWR and AP1000. The staff is reviewing applications to certify two 

other designs: the U.S. Evolutionary Power Reactor and the U.S. Advanced Pressurized Water 

Reactor. 

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. 11-039 March 9, 2011
The FSER will be available through the NRC’s electronic documents database, ADAMS, 

by going to: http://wba.nrc.gov:8080/ves, and entering accession number ML103470210. 

More information about the ESBWR design review can be found on the NRC’s website at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/design-cert/esbwr.html.

###

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 website.
§ 27.120 Evaluation and disposition of applications and proposals for research to be conducted or supported by a Federal department or agency. ( a ) The department or agency head will evaluate all applications and proposals involving human subjects submitted to the Federal department or agency through such officers and employees of the Federal department or agency and such experts and consultants as the department or agency head determines to be appropriate. This evaluation will take into consideration the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained.
( b ) On the basis of this evaluation, the department or agency head may approve or disapprove the application or proposal, or enter into negotiations to develop an approvable one.
#### §§ 8c.52-8c.59 [Reserved]
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

CRYSTAL CULLIN, as Guardian of )

AMELIA PHILLIPS )

)

)

Plaintiffs, )

v. )

) C.A. No.: N20C-04-194 FJJ

REGAL HEIGHTS HEALTH CARE )

AND REHAB CENTER, LLC, )

a Delaware corporation )

)

)

Defendants. )

ORDER REGARDING AFFIDAVIT OF MERIT CONCERNING 

MEDICAL CARE PROVIDED TO PLAINTIFF BY DEFENDANT REGAL 

HEIGHTS HEALTH CARE AND REHAB CENTER, LLC.

This 23rd day of December, 2020, the Court has reviewed in camera

Plaintiff’s affidavit of merit pursuant to 18 Del.C. § 6853(a)(1) 6853(d). Having 

done so, the Court finds:

1. The affidavit of merit is signed by an expert witness.

2. The affidavit is accompanied by a current curriculum vitae of the expert 

witness.

3. The affidavit contains an opinion of the expert witness that there are 

reasonable grounds to believe that the applicable standard of care was breached by 

Defendant Regal Heights Health Care and Rehab Center (“Defendant”), and that the 
breach of the applicable standard of care by Defendant was the proximate cause of 

the injuries claimed in the Complaint. 

4. The curriculum vitae accompanying the affidavit establishes that the 

expert witness is licensed to practice nursing in the state of Connecticut, that the 

expert witness has been a certified legal nursing consultant as of the date of the 

affidavit for the three (3) years immediately preceding the alleged negligent acts

described in the Complaint, and has been engaged in the treatment of patients and/or 

in the teaching/academic side of nursing in the same of similar field as the named 

Defendant within the last three (3) years.

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the affidavit of merit complies

with the requirements of 18 Del.C. §6853(a)(1) and 18 Del.C. §6853(c).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 /s/ Francis F. Jones, Jr.

Francis F. Jones, Jr., Judge

cc: File&ServeXpress
No. 89-6491.

#### Esteves *v.*Texas.

Ct. Crim. App. Tex. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 223 (Friday, November 19, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 67698]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25708]


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

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED


Procurement List; Proposed Deletions

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled.

ACTION: Proposed deletions from procurement list.

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

SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing to delete from the Procurement List 
services previously furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons 
who are blind or have other severe disabilities.
    Comments Must be Received on or Before: December 19, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely 
Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, 
Arlington, Virginia 22202-3259.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheryl D. Kennerly, (703) 603-7740.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published pursuant to 41 
U.S.C 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested 
persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

Deletions

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    I certify that the following action will not have a significant 
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors 
considered for this certification were:
    1. If approved, the action may result in additional reporting, 
recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities.
    2. If approved, the action may result in authorizing small entities 
to furnish the services to the Government.
    3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would 
accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-
48c) in connection with the services proposed for deletion from the 
Procurement List.

End of Certification

    The following services are proposed for deletion from the 
Procurement List:

Services

Service Type/Location: Commissary Shelf Stocking & Custodial, Brooks 
Air Force Base, Texas.
NPA: Bexar County Mental Health Mental Retardation Center, San 
Antonio, Texas.
Contract Activity: Defense Commissary Agency, Fort Lee, Virginia.

Service Type/Location: Commissary Shelf Stocking & Custodial, Kelley 
Air Force Base, Texas.
NPA: Bexar County Mental Health Mental Retardation Center, San 
Antonio, Texas.
Contract Activity: Defense Commissary Agency, Fort Lee, Virginia.

Sheryl D. Kennerly,
Director, Information Management.
[FR Doc. 04-25708 Filed 11-18-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6353-01-P
#### § 265.32 Trespassing.

No person shall come onto the site other than in pursuance of official government business or other properly authorized activities.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

REGINA CLARK,

Appellant,

v.

DAVID T. CLARK,

Appellee.

No. 2D2023-2399

May 24, 2024

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 from the Circuit Court for 

Hillsborough County; Lindsay M. Alvarez, Judge.

Regina Clark, pro se.

No appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, VILLANTI, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
§ 890.1111 Employing office responsibilities. ( a ) *Providing information to employees.* Employing offices are responsible for providing employees who are eligible to enroll under this part with literature developed by OPM that sets forth their rights under this subpart. This literature must be distributed to employees prior to each open season occurring under § 890.301.
( b ) *Administration of the enrollment process.* The employing office must establish procedures for notifying the former employee, child, or former spouse about his or her eligibility to enroll, including what documents are needed to determine eligibility, and for accepting enrollment registrations.
( c ) *Collecting premiums.* ( 1 ) Collection of the contributions is the responsibility of the employing office of the employee or annuitant at the time of the qualifying event.
( 2 ) The employing office must submit all premium payments collected from enrollees along with its regular health benefits payments to OPM in accordance with procedures established by that Office.
( d ) *Health benefits file.* The employing office must maintain a health benefits file for the enrollee as a file separate from the personnel records of the employee or former employee. This file may be destroyed 2 years after the end of the calendar year during which the 18- or 36-month period described in § 890.1107 (a) or (b)(1) expires.
[54 FR 52339, Dec. 21, 1989, as amended at 55 FR 22891, June 5, 1990]
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3375 

To direct the President to impose duties on merchandise from the People’s 

Republic of China in an amount equivalent to the estimated annual 

loss of revenue to holders of United States intellectual property rights 

as a result of violations of such intellectual property rights in China, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 4, 2011 

Mr. KING of Iowa introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To direct the President to impose duties on merchandise 

from the People’s Republic of China in an amount equivalent to the estimated annual loss of revenue to holders 

of United States intellectual property rights as a result 

of violations of such intellectual property rights in China, 

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, 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3375 IH

1 SECTION 1. STUDY AND REPORT ON VIOLATIONS OF 

2 UNITED STATES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 

3 RIGHTS IN CHINA. 

4 (a) STUDY.—The United States Trade Representa5 tive shall conduct an annual study to determine the esti6 mated annual loss of revenue to holders of United States 

7 intellectual property rights as a result of violations of such 

8 intellectual property rights in the People’s Republic of 

9 China. 

10 (b) REPORT.—Not later than 120 days after the date 

11 of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the 

12 United States Trade Representative shall submit to Con13 gress a report that contains the results of the study con14 ducted pursuant to subsection (a). 

15 SEC. 2. IMPOSITION OF DUTIES ON MERCHANDISE FROM 

16 CHINA AND DISTRIBUTION OF PROCEEDS OF 

17 SUCH DUTIES TO HOLDERS OF CERTAIN 

18 UNITED STATES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 

19 RIGHTS. 

20 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 

21 President, acting through the United States Trade Rep22 resentative, shall— 

23 (1) impose duties on merchandise from the Peo24 ple’s Republic of China in an amount equivalent to 

25 the estimated annual loss of revenue to holders of 

26 United States intellectual property rights as a result 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3375 IH

1 of violations of such intellectual property rights in 

2 China, as determined by the Trade Representative 

3 pursuant to the study conducted under section 1(a) 

4 and contained in the report submitted to Congress 

5 under section 1(b); and 

6 (2) provide for the distribution of the proceeds 

7 of such duties to holders of United States intellec8 tual property rights described in paragraph (1) on a 

9 proportional basis. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**EXHIBIT 31****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****SECTION 302(A) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**I, Bruce Harris, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports on Form 8-K containingdistribution or servicing reports filed in respect of periods included in the year coveredby this annual report, of Volkswagen Credit Auto Master Owner Trust, Series 2005-1;  2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a whole, does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessaryto make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information required to beprovided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar,agreement for inclusion in these reports is included in these reports;  4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicer under thepooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and based upon my knowledge and the annualcompliance review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports,the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and  5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the servicer’s compliancewith the minimum servicing standards based upon the report provided by an independentpublic accountant, after conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform SingleAttestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the poolingand servicing, or similar, agreement, that is included in these reports.March 30, 2007         /s/ Bruce Harris   Name:  Bruce Harris   Title:  Chief Financial Officer, VW Credit, Inc.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6103

GREGORY WARDELL DRIVER,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director, Virginia Department of 

Corrections,

Respondent – Appellee,

and

BILL WATSON; PORTSMOUTH CIRCUIT COURT,

Respondents.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District 

Judge. (2:14-cv-00590-RAJ-LRL)

Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: May 23, 2016

Before SHEDD, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory Wardell Driver, Appellant Pro Se. Kathleen Beatty 

Martin, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, 

for Appellee.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Gregory Wardell Driver seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The 

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues 

a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A)

(2012). 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) (2012). When the district court denies 

relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by 

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is 

debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 

(2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). 

When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the 

prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural 

ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable 

claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. 

at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that 

Driver has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 
4

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal as moot.* 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

 * We note that Driver’s supervised probation ended in 

November 2015.