alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 785.10 Matters protected against disclosure. ( a ) *Protective measures.* The ALJ may limit discovery or introduction of evidence or issue such protective or other orders as in the ALJ's judgment may be needed to prevent undue disclosure of classified or sensitive documents or information. Where the ALJ determines that documents containing classified or sensitive matter must be made available to a party in order to avoid prejudice, the ALJ may direct the other party to prepare an unclassified and nonsensitive summary or extract of the documents. The ALJ may compare the extract or summary with the original to ensure that it is supported by the source document and that it omits only so much as must remain undisclosed. The summary or extract may be admitted as evidence in the record.
( b ) *Arrangements for access.* If the ALJ determines that the summary procedure outlined in paragraph (a) of this section is unsatisfactory, and that classified or otherwise sensitive matter must form part of the record in order to avoid prejudice to a party, the ALJ may provide the parties with the opportunity to make arrangements that permit a party or a representative to have access to such matter without compromising sensitive information. Such arrangements may include obtaining security clearances or giving counsel for a party access to sensitive information and documents subject to assurances against further disclosure, including a protective order, if necessary.
### §8101. Definitions and construction

(a) Definitions.—In this chapter:

(1) Contractor.—The term "contractor" means the department, division, or other unit of a person responsible for the performance under the contract.

(2) Controlled substance.—The term "controlled substance" means a controlled substance in schedules I through V of section 202 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 812).

(3) Conviction.—The term "conviction" means a finding of guilt (including a plea of nolo contendere), an imposition of sentence, or both, by a judicial body charged with the responsibility to determine violations of Federal or State criminal drug statutes.

(4) Criminal drug statute.—The term "criminal drug statute" means a criminal statute involving manufacture, distribution, dispensation, use, or possession of a controlled substance.

(5) Drug-free workplace.—The term "drug-free workplace" means a site of an entity—

(A) for the performance of work done in connection with a specific contract or grant described in section 8102 or 8103 of this title; and

(B) at which employees of the entity are prohibited from engaging in the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance in accordance with the requirements of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public Law 100–690, 102 Stat. 4181).

(6) Employee.—The term "employee" means the employee of a contractor or grantee directly engaged in the performance of work pursuant to the contract or grant described in section 8102 or 8103 of this title.

(7) Federal agency.—The term "Federal agency" means an agency as defined in section 552(f) of title 5.

(8) Grantee.—The term "grantee" means the department, division, or other unit of a person responsible for the performance under the grant.

(b) Construction.—This chapter does not require law enforcement agencies to comply with this chapter if the head of the agency determines it would be inappropriate in connection with the agency's undercover operations.

(Pub. L. 111–350, §3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3826.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 8101(a)(1) | 41:706(7). | Pub. L. 100–690, title V, §§5157, 5158, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4308. |
| 8101(a)(2) | 41:706(3). | |
| 8101(a)(3) | 41:706(4). | |
| 8101(a)(4) | 41:706(5). | |
| 8101(a)(5) | 41:706(1). | |
| 8101(a)(6) | 41:706(2). | |
| 8101(a)(7) | 41:706(8). | |
| 8101(a)(8) | 41:706(6). | |
| 8101(b) | 41:707. | |

Section
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2410

To prohibit the importation for sale of foreign-made flags of the United 

States of America. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 10, 2003

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

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To prohibit the importation for sale of foreign-made flags 

of the United States of America.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Genuine American 

5 Flag Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. IMPORTATION FOR SALE OF FOREIGN-MADE AMER7 ICAN FLAGS PROHIBITED. 

8 Beginning 6 months after the date of the enactment 

9 of this Act, no flag of the United States of America (re10 gardless of size and whether or not in compliance with 
2

•HR 2410 IH 

1 the standard proportions prescribed by Executive order) 

2 that is the product or manufacture of any foreign country 

3 or instrumentality may be imported for sale into the 

4 United States.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 224 (Monday, November 22, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 67899]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-25810]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE


Contract Financing: Contractor's Request for Progress Payments

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Defense Acquisition Regulations (DAR) Council is currently 
reviewing DoD's use of Standard Form (SF) 1443, Contractor's Request 
for Progress Payments. As part of this review, the DAR Council would 
like to hear the views of interested parties on what improvements could 
be made to the form, including the instructions, for use on DoD 
contracts. Respondents are also encouraged to describe any problems 
they have experienced in using the form on DoD contracts.

DATES: Submit written comments to the address shown below on or before 
January 6, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to: Office of the Director, Defense 
Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Policy Directorate, Attn: Mr. David 
Capitano, Room 3C838, 3000 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3000. 
Comments may also be submitted by fax at (703) 614-0719 (Attn: Mr. 
David Capitano), or by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6f0b0e19060b410c0e1f061b0e01002f001c0b41020603"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dcb8bdaab5b8f2bfbdacb5a8bdb2b39cb3afb8f2b1b5b0">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Capitano, DPAP Policy 
Directorate, by telephone at (703) 847-7486, or by e-mail at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fb9f9a8d929fd5989a8b928f9a9594bb94889fd5969297"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d9bdb8afb0bdf7bab8a9b0adb8b7b699b6aabdf7b4b0b5">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Based on the public comments received, the 
DAR Council will consider to what extent revisions (if any) to SF 1443 
are needed. Any such revisions to the form will be published in the 
Federal Register as a proposed rule for public comment. Input may 
include, but is not limited to, the following areas:
    1. Any revisions necessary to improve consistency between the form 
and the Progress Payments clause at 52.232-16 of the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation.
    2. Simplification of the form and its instructions.
    3. The impact any potential changes to the form may have on 
contractor and/or Government systems.

Michele P. Peterson,
Executive Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations Council.
[FR Doc. 04-25810 Filed 11-19-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-08-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-7077

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus SAMUEL ROBERT QUEEN, JR., Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (1:93-cr00369-AMD-1; 1:06-cv-01250-AMD) Submitted: October 17, 2006 Decided: October 23, 2006
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Samuel Robert Queen, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Samuel Robert Queen, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order treating his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion as a successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, and dismissing it on that basis. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000); Reid v. Angelone , 369 F.3d 363, 369 (4th Cir. 2004). 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 Queen has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. Additionally, we construe Queen’s notice of appeal and informal brief as an application to file a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. United States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir. 2003). In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a prisoner must assert claims- 3 - based on either: (1) a new rule of constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review; or (2) newly discovered evidence, not previously discoverable by due diligence, that would be sufficient to establish by clear and convincing evidence that, but for constitutional error, no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty of the offense. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b)(2), 2255 (2000). Queen’s claims do not satisfy either of these criteria. Therefore, we deny authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion. 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
No. IV-12-017

Contact: Victor Dricks (817) 200-1128

 Lara Uselding (817) 200-1519

 

May 7, 2012 

 E-Mail: OPA4.Resource@nrc.gov

STATEMENT FROM CHAIRMAN GREGORY JACZKO ON SAN ONOFRE RESTART

“Despite some erroneous reports in the media, there is no NRC timetable for restart of the 

San Onofre nuclear reactors, which have been shut down over safety issues affecting the steam 

generators. We have yet to receive the utility’s written response documenting their completion of 

actions described in the March 27 Confirmatory Action Letter, so any discussion of a date for the 

restart of Unit 2 or Unit 3 is clearly premature. Once we receive their response, we will take 

whatever time is necessary to conduct a thorough safety review.”

###

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 Region IV

 1600 E. Lamar Blvd.

 Arlington, TX 76011 - 4125

Site: www.nrc.gov

Blog: http://public-blog.nrc-gateway.gov
### **CHAPTER 26A—NATIONAL SPACE GRANT COLLEGE AND FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM**
________________________________________________________________________ 

TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 20-918 

MARITIME MATTERS 

Law Enforcement and Shiprider 

Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and GUYANA 

Signed at Georgetown April 10, 2001 

Entered into force September 18, 2020 
 

 

NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)— 

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.”
##### 



RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD CERTIFICATE June 12, 2003 Exhibit 10.50 Clyde Heintzelman
15105 Sunflower Court
Rockville, MD 20853-1472 USA Dear Clyde: Pursuant to the terms and conditions of the TeleCommunication Systems, Inc.
Amended & Restated 1997 Stock Incentive Plan (the Plan), you have been
granted a Restricted Stock Award (the Award) for the number of shares (each
an Award Share, and collectively, the Award Shares) of the Class A common
stock, par value $0.01 per share (the Common Stock) of TeleCommunication
Systems, Inc. (the Company) as outlined below. This Certificate constitutes part of and is subject to the terms and provisions
of the attached Restricted Stock Grant Agreement (the Agreement) which is
incorporated herein by reference. Granted To: Clyde Heintzelman     
(the Employee)
Grant Date: June 12, 2003
Award Shares Granted: 10,000
Vesting Schedule: 100% after 1 Year 10,000 on 06/12/2004 By my signature below, I hereby acknowledge receipt of this Award granted on
the Grant Date shown above, which has been issued to me under the terms and
conditions of the Agreement and the Plan. I understand that I will forfeit all
unvested Award Shares at the close of business on my last day of employment at
TCS. I further acknowledge receipt of the Plan Prospectus and the latest annual
report or other SEC filing, and agree to be bound by all of the terms and
conditions of the Award, as evidenced in the Agreement, and the Plan. Signature: /s/ Clyde A. Heintzelman
    
    Date: ________________Clyde Heintzelman
 Note: If there are any discrepancies in the name or address shown above, please
make the appropriate corrections on this form.
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Accounting Officer of Proton Laboratories, Inc., pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and Section 1350 of 18 U.S.C.
63.

I, Edward Alexander, the Chief Accounting Officer of Proton Laboratories, Inc.
hereby certify that Proton Laboratories, Inc.'s periodic report on Form 10-KSB
Amendment Number 2 and the financial statements contained therein fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d) and that information contained in the periodic
report on Form 10-KSB and the financial statements contained therein fairly
represents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of the
operations of Proton Laboratories, Inc.

Date:  August 15, 2005

/s/ Edward Alexander
Edward Alexander
Chief Accounting Officer of
Proton Laboratories, Inc.

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to Proton
Laboratories, Inc. and will be retained by Proton Laboratories, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Bomptin Realty Co., Inc., Respondent, v. City of New York, Appellant.

The complaint sets forth a cause of action at law, to which equitable relief is added as an incident. There is no threat of future wrongful acts on the part of defendant. Complete relief for the alleged wrongful acts of defendant may be granted at law. If defendant is found to be liable, defendant may be east in damages for the expense of removing the nuisance and for other injuries to plaintiff’s property. The mere prayer in the complaint for the removal of the nuisance does not transform this cause of action from one essentially at law to one in equity. *{City of Syvaeuse*V. *Kogan,*234 N. Y. 457.) Johnston, Acting P. J., Adel, Sneed, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur.
### [§7684. Repealed. Pub. L. 107–135, title I, §102(a)(1), Jan. 23, 2002, 115 Stat. 2448]

Section, added Pub. L. 105–368, title VIII, §803(a), Nov. 11, 1998, 112 Stat. 3358, provided that the Secretary could not make education debt reduction payments to individuals who had not commenced participation in the Education Debt Reduction Program before Dec. 31, 2001.
#### § 295.31 Qualification of proposers.

Awards under this subpart will be available to all businesses, subject to the limitations set out in §§ 295.3 and 295.32.

[62 FR 64687, Dec. 9, 1997]
#### § 971.402 Consultation and cooperation with Federal and State agencies.

Before issuance or transfer of a commercial recovery permit, the Administrator will conclude any consultations in cooperation with other Federal and State agencies which were initiated pursuant to §§ 971.211 and 971.200(g). These consultations will be held to assure compliance with, as applicable and among other statutes, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. The Administrator also will consult, before any issuance, transfer, modification or renewal of a permit, with any affected Regional Fishery Management Council established pursuant to section 302 of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 1852) if the activities undertaken pursuant to the permit could adversely affect any fishery within the Fishery Conservation Zone (now known as the Exclusive Economic Zone), or any anadromous species or Continental Shelf fishery resource subject to the exclusive management authority of the United States beyond that zone.
§ 870.907 Termination and conversion. ( a ) Assigned insurance terminates under the conditions stated in subpart F of this part.
( b ) ( 1 ) When an insured individual's insurance terminates, an assignee has the right to convert all or part of the group insurance to an individual policy on the insured individual. The conditions stated in subpart F of this part apply to assignees who elect to convert.
( 2 ) When there is more than one assignee, each assignee has the right to convert all or part of his/her share of the insurance. Any assignee who doesn't convert loses all ownership of the insurance.
( 3 ) When there is more than one assignee, the maximum amount of insurance each assignee will be able to convert is determined by the dollar amount corresponding to the assignee's share of the total insurance. This amount will be rounded up to the next higher thousand, if it's not already an even thousand dollar amount.
( 4 ) Premiums for converted life insurance are based on the insured individual's age and class of risk at the time the conversion policy is issued.
( 5 ) The employing office must notify each assignee of the conversion right at the time the assigned group insurance terminates.
( c ) An assignment terminates 31 days after the insurance terminates, unless the insured individual is reemployed in or returns to a position in which he or she is entitled to coverage under this part within 31 days after the insurance terminates. If the individual returns to Federal service, Basic insurance and any Option A and/or Option B insurance acquired through returning to service is subject to the existing assignment.
[62 FR 48731, Sept. 17, 1997, as amended at 64 FR 72465, Dec. 28, 1999; 75 FR 60586, Oct. 1, 2010]
### SUBCHAPTER IV—EFFECTIVE DATE
### §116. Technical data

In this subtitle, the term "technical data"—

(1) means recorded information (regardless of the form or method of the recording) of a scientific or technical nature (including computer software documentation) relating to supplies procured by an agency; but

(2) does not include computer software or financial, administrative, cost or pricing, or management data or other information incidental to contract administration.

(Pub. L. 111–350, §3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3681.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 116 | 41:259(c)(6). | June 30, 1949, ch. 288, title III, §309(c)(6), as added Pub. L. 98–369, title VII, §2711(a)(3), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1180; Pub. L. 98–577, title V, §504(a)(4), Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 3086; Pub. L. 103–355, title I, §1551, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3299. |
| | 41:403(8). | Pub. L. 93–400, §4(8), formerly §4(9), as added Pub. L. 98–577, title I, §102(3), Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 3067; redesignated as §4(8), Pub. L. 100–679, §3(c), Nov. 17, 1988, 102 Stat. 4056; Pub. L. 103–355, title VIII, §8001(b)(1)–(3), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3386. |

Section