alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 1222.1 Scope.

This part establishes a consumer product safety standard for bedside sleepers.
### §12801. General authority

Among the alternative model programs that the Secretary shall make available for use by participating jurisdictions under the provisions of section 12743 of this title shall be model programs specified in this part. The Secretary shall keep these specified model programs under review and submit to Congress such recommendations for change as the Secretary determines to be appropriate.

(Pub. L. 101–625, title II, §251, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4119.)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LILIANA RAMIREZ TRUJILLO, Petitioner,

v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. No. 12-73293 Agency No. A089-091-380

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted August 29, 2014 ** Seattle, Washington Before: NOONAN, HAWKINS, and GOULD, Circuit Judges. Liliana Ramirez Trujillo (“Petitioner”), a twenty-six-year-old agricultural worker and mother, seeks review of th e Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision affirming her order of removal and dismissing her appeal of the Immigration 

# FILED

SEP 05 2014 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her motion to suppress evidence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny her petition for review. We need not reach Petitioner’s sole ar gument on appeal—that the BIA erred in affirming the denial of her motion to s uppress evidence—because, after the IJ denied this motion, Petitioner admitted the allegati ons in the Notice to Appear (“NTA”) and conceded that she was removable as charged. 1 T hese admissions and concession of removability were sufficient for t h e government to meet its evidentiary burden, Perez-Mejia v. Holder , 663 F.3d 403, 414–15 (9th Cir. 2011), and they provide an independent basis upon which to sust ain Petitioner’s order of removal, I.N.S. v. LopezMendoza , 468 U.S. 1032, 1043 (1984). Even if Immigration and Customs En forcement (“ICE”) agents egregiously violated Petitioner’s Fourth and/or Fifth Amendment rights when they initially arrested and detained her, these violations “would not prevent reliance by the [BIA] on [her] voluntary admission of illegal entry at the subsequent deportation hearing.” Rodriguez-Gonzalez v. I.N.S. , 640 F.2d 1139, 1140–41 (9th Cir. 1981) (citing MedinaSandoval v. I.N.S. , 524 F.2d 658, 659 (9th Cir. 1975) and Cuevas-Ortega v. I.N.S. , 588 F.2d 1274, 1278 n.9 (9th Cir. 1979)).

1 Petitioner’s counsel made these repres entations on her behalf during the pleading stage of her removal hearing. Absent egregious circumstances or a due process violation, neither of which Petiti oner alleges, she is bound by her attorney’s representations. See Torres-Chavez v. Holder , 567 F.3d 1096, 1101–02 (9th Cir. 2009); Magallanes-Damian v. I.N.S. , 783 F.2d 931, 934 (9th Cir. 1986).Because Petitioner’s admissions and con cession of removability constituted “substantial evidence” supporting the BIA’s determination that Petitioner is removable, id. at 1140, we deny her petition for review. PETITION DENIED.
#### § 1306.2 Purpose.

The purpose of this rule is to prohibit the sale of lawn darts, which have been found to present an unreasonable risk of skull puncture injuries to children.
#### Mulkern v. Louisville & Jefferson County Planning & Zoning Commission et al.

March 26, 1948.

Wilbur Fields and C. Maxwell Brown for appellant.

Gilbert Burnett, Lawrence Duncan, Samuel iSteinfeld, Peter, Hey-burn & Marshall and Gavin Cochran for appellee.

Opinion of the Court by

Stanley, Commissioner

Reversing.

The suit tests the validity of an order of the Louisville & Jefferson County Planning & Zoning Commission, entered on June 4, 1947, changing the zoning of a. tract of about 15 acres, known as the Wetstein tract, in the suburbs of Louisville. It is on the TaylorsvilleRoad about one-half mile from the city limits. The territory had been originally classified as “A One-Family Residence area.” By the challenged order it was put into the classification, “B-3 Multi-Family Residence-District.” The circuit court on appeal from the order made separate findings of law and fact and disposed of' a number of contentions of the parties and confirmed the-order of the Commission. The appeal to the circuit' court and to this court is by Roy Y. Mulkern, the owner of nearby property, against the Zoning Commission, its members, certain county officers, and a building construction company. However, amici curiae briefs have-been filed by interested parties, both in opposition and-in support of the judgment.

The tract of land rezoned has been acquired by per- - sons who propose to organize a corporation and improve ■ it with the construction of a “garden type” multi-family residence development, comprised of 43 buildings ■ and designed to house 184 families.

*369The court found that the proposed construction conforms to the comprehensive master plan of the Commission for the physical development of the county outside the city and to regulations and restrictions of the “B-3” classification of the Commission. And, further, that the rezoning of the territory will cause no undue hardship or invasion of the rights of the property owners with respect to the sewer- and other public facilities serving the community generally.

The question of validity of the order of the Zoning Commission, made on the same day, June 4, 1947, which established the classification of “B-3, Multi-Family Residence District” was raised in this ease before it was in Louisville & Jefferson Planning & Zoning Commission v. Ogden, 307 Ky. 362, 210 S. W. 2d 771, an opinion delivered today, but the trial court held the issue to have been raised too late. We have held in the Ogden case that the order is invalid, therefore, the conclusion follows that the rezoning and placing of the parcel of land in this case was not authorized. It too was assigned to a non-existent classification.

The judgment is accordingly reversed.
### §1202a. Repealed. Pub. L. 87–543, title I, §136(b), July 25, 1962, 76 Stat. 197

Section, act Aug. 28, 1950, ch. 809, title III, pt. 4, §344(a), 64 Stat. 554, provided, in the case of any State without a plan for aid to the blind approved on Jan. 1, 1949, for approval of the plan of such a State conforming to all requirements except those relating to determination of need and consideration of resources but conditioned payments to the State meeting the excepted requirement.

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

#### Effective and Termination Dates

Section 136(b) of Pub. L. 87–543 also repealed section 344(b) of act Aug. 28, 1950, as amended Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1206, title III, §302, 68 Stat. 1097; Apr. 25, 1957, Pub. L. 85–26, 71 Stat. 27; Aug. 28, 1958, Pub. L. 85–840, title V, §509, 72 Stat. 1051; Sept. 13, 1960, Pub. L. 86–778, title VII, §706, 74 Stat. 995, which provided that this section should become effective Oct. 1, 1950 and terminate June 30, 1964.
Cover: USFWS

Louisiana

National Wildlife

Refuges and National

Fish Hatchery

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

1 800/344 WILD

http://southeast.fws.gov

May 2002
1. Atchafalaya NWR, Krotz Springs, 337/585 2101 ■■■■■ ■ ■■■ ■■■■■■■

2. Bayou Cocodrie NWR, Ferriday, 318/336 7119 ■ ■ ■■ ■■■ ■ ■ ■

3. Bayou Sauvage NWR, New Orleans, 985/646 7555 ■■■■ ■■■■■ ■■■■ ■

4. Big Branch Marsh NWR, Lacombe, 985/882 3881 ■■■■ ■■■■■ ■■■■■■

5. Black Bayou NWR, Farmerville, 318/726 4222 ■■ ■■■ ■■■ ■ ■■■■ ■

6. Bogue Chitto NWR, Slidell, 985/646 7555 ■ ■ ■■ ■■■■

7. Breton NWR, Venice, 504/646 7555 ■ ■ ■■

8. Cameron Prairie NWR, Bell City, 337/598 2216 ■ ■■■■■■■■ ■ ■ ■■■

9. Cat Island NWR, St. Francisville, 225/635 4753 ■■ ■ ■■■■ ■ ■ ■■■■

10. Catahoula NWR, Rhinehart, 318/992 5261 ■■ ■■ ■■■■■■■■■■

11. D’Arbonne NWR, Farmerville, 318/726 4222 ■■■■■ ■ ■■■ ■■■■■■

12. Delta NWR, Venice, 985/534 2235 ■ ■ ■ ■■■

13. Grand Cote NWR, Marksville, 318/253 4238 ■■■■ ■ ■■■ ■■ ■

14. Handy Brake NWR, Farmerville, 318/726 4222 ■ ■■ ■■■ ■ ■

15. Lacassine NWR, Lake Arthur, 337/774 5923 ■■■■■ ■■■■■ ■■■■■■■

16. Lake Ophelia NWR, Marksville, 318/253 4238 ■■■■ ■■■■■ ■ ■■■■

17. Mandalay NWR, Houma, 985/853 1078 ■ ■■ ■■■ ■■ ■

18. Natchitoches NFH, Natchitoches, 318/352 5324 ■ ■ ■■ ■■■■ ■■

19. Sabine NWR, Hackberry, 337/762 3816 ■ ■■■ ■■■■■ ■■■■■■

20. Shell Keys NWR, New Iberia, 985/646 7555 ■

21. Tensas River NWR, Tallulah, 318/574 2664 ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■

22. Upper Ouachita NWR, Farmerville, 318/726 4222 ■■■■ ■ ■■■ ■■■■■■■

National Wildlife

Refuges (NWR) and

National Fish Hatchery

(NFH) in Louisiana

Spring

Summer

Fall

Winter

Visitor Ctr/Contact Station

Visitor Ctr/Open Weekends

Walk-in Only Areas

Day Use Only

Food/Lodging Nearby

Refuge/Hatchery Literature

Educational Programs

Auto-Tour Route

Hiking Trails

Wildlife Viewing Sites

Non-Motorized Watercraft

Motorized Watercraft

Hunting

Fishing

Fee

Best

Wildlife

Viewing

Seasons

165

165

165 425

167

167

167

171

171

190 190

65

71

71

71

79

90

90 61

84

80

10 10

12 12

20

49

49 55

55

1

6

17

3 7

20 12

8 15 19

13

16

2

21

10

18

11

14

22

4

5

9

Shreveport

Baton 

Rouge

New Orleans
### §10265. Compensation of members

#### (a) In general

Each member of the Board shall be paid at the rate of pay payable for level III of the Executive Schedule for each day (including travel time) such member is engaged in the work of the Board.

#### (b) Travel expenses

Each member of the Board may receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in the same manner as is permitted under sections 5702 and 5703 of title 5.

(Pub. L. 97–425, title V, §505, as added Pub. L. 100–202, §101(d) [title III], Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1329–104, 1329–121; Pub. L. 100–203, title V, §5051, Dec. 22, 1987, 101 Stat. 1330–249.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Level III of the Executive Schedule, referred to in subsec. (a), is set out in section 5314 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

#### Codification

Pub. L. 100–202 and Pub. L. 100–203 added identical sections.
### SUBCHAPTER IV—STATE OR REGIONAL SOLID WASTE PLANS
**IN WITNESS WHEREOF**, each of the parties hereto has caused this Joinder Agreement to be dulyexecuted by the authorized person whose signature appears below.     MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC       By: /s/ Janice Fetsch Name: Janice Fetsch    Title: Authorized Signatory       CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC.       By: /s/ Laurie A. Hesslein Name: Laurie A. Hesslein    Title: Managing Director       CITIGROUP MANAGED FUTURES LLC       By: /s/ Jerry Pascucci Name: Jerry Pascucci    Title: President       EACH OF THE FUNDS LISTED ON EXHIBIT A HERETO       By: Citigroup Managed Futures LLC, the general
AFS-13-169-E 

February 4, 2013 

Mr. Jose Cordova 

Director of Quality and Materials 

Compass Airlines, Inc. 

7500 Airline Drive, Suite 130 

Minneapolis, MN 55450 

Dear Mr. Cordova: 

This letter is in response to your correspondence sent to the public docket dated 

January 22, 2013 (public docket No. FAA-2013-0059) petitioning the Federal Aviation 

Administration for an exemption from § 121.803(c)(3) and Appendix A of part 121, Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations. The proposed exemption, if granted, would provide relief from 

the requirement to include Atropine in an Emergency Medical Kit (EMK). 

On January 25, 2013, the FAA issued Grant of Exemption No. 10690 (copy enclosed) to 

Airlines for America, National Air Carrier Association and Regional Airline Association and 

its members. The FAA finds that Compass Airlines, Inc., is covered under Exemption 

No. 10690; therefore, we will take no further action on your petition. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Ida M. Klepper 

Manager, Airmen and 

Airspace Rules Division 

Enclosure
No: I-15-036 September 23, 2015

CONTACT: Diane Screnci 610-337-5330

Neil Sheehan 610-337-5331

NRC Names New Resident Inspector at Ginna Nuclear Power Plant

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in King of Prussia, Pa., have 

selected Jeromy Petch as the new Resident Inspector at the R.E. Ginna nuclear 

power plant in Ontario, N.Y. The plant is operated by Exelon. 

“Jeromy Petch’s experience, training, and commitment to safety will 

help the NRC in its mission to protect people and the environment by ensuring 

the safe operation of Ginna,” said NRC Region I Administrator Dan Dorman. 

Petch joined the NRC’s Region I office in King of Prussia in August 2013 as a project engineer. 

He has since completed an extensive inspector qualification program. Prior to joining the agency, Petch 

worked at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard as a nuclear fluid systems engineer for nuclear-powered naval 

vessels. He holds bachelor’s degrees in mechanical engineering and nuclear engineering from Penn 

State University. 

Each U.S. commercial nuclear power plant has at least two Resident Inspectors. Petch joins 

Senior Resident Inspector Neil Perry at the site. They serve as the agency’s eyes and ears at the facility, 

conducting inspections, monitoring significant work projects, and interacting with plant workers and 

the public.

The Ginna Resident Inspectors can be reached at 315-524-6935.
#### § 323.2 Prohibited acts.

In connection with promoting or offering for sale any good or service, in or affecting commerce as “commerce” is defined in section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 44, it is an unfair or deceptive act or practice within the meaning of section 5(a)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1), to label any product as Made in the United States unless the final assembly or processing of the product occurs in the United States, all significant processing that goes into the product occurs in the United States, and all or virtually all ingredients or components of the product are made and sourced in the United States.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3549 

To amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to require Members of 

Congress to place their stocks, bonds, commodities futures, and other 

forms of securities in a blind trust. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 2, 2011 

Mr. BACHUS (for himself and Mr. DUFFY) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To amend the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 to require 

Members of Congress to place their stocks, bonds, commodities futures, and other forms of securities in a blind 

trust. 

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 ‘‘Congressional Blind 

5 Trust Act of 2011’’. 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3549 IH

1 SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO USE 

2 BLIND TRUST. 

3 The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. 

4 App.) is amended by inserting after section 101 the fol5 lowing new section: 

6 ‘‘SEC. 101A. MEMBERS OF CONGRESS REQUIRED TO ESTAB7 LISH A BLIND TRUST. 

8 ‘‘(a) REQUIREMENT.—Each Member of Congress 

9 shall place all of such person’s stocks, bonds, commodities 

10 futures, and other forms of securities, including securities 

11 held jointly with such person’s spouse, in a qualified blind 

12 trust (as defined in section 102(f)(3)). 

13 ‘‘(b) EXCLUSION.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to 

14 the financial interests or benefits described under section 

15 102(i). 

16 ‘‘(c) TIMING AND EXTENSION.— 

17 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Each Member of Congress 

18 shall comply with subsection (a) not later than 30 

19 days after taking office, or in the case of a person 

20 who is a Member of Congress on the date of enact21 ment of the Congressional Blind Trust Act of 2011, 

22 not later than 30 days after such date of enactment. 

23 ‘‘(2) EXTENSION.—A Member of Congress may 

24 file, with the Clerk of the House of Representatives 

25 in the case of a Representative or Delegate of Con26 gress and the Resident Commissioner from Puerto 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3549 IH

1 Rico, and with the Secretary of the Senate, in the 

2 case of a Senator, for an additional 30-day extension 

3 to comply with subsection (a). 

4 ‘‘(d) CIVIL PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY.— 

5 The Attorney General may bring a civil action in any ap6 propriate United States district court against any Member 

7 of Congress who knowingly and willfully fails to comply 

8 with subsection (a) by the end of the time period specified 

9 in subsection (c). The court in which such action is 

10 brought may assess against such person a civil penalty not 

11 to exceed $50,000.’’. 

Æ 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
### §13381. Report

Not later than 2 years after October 24, 1992, the Secretary shall submit a report to the Congress that includes an assessment of—

(1) the feasibility and economic, energy, social, environmental, and competitive implications, including implications for jobs, of stabilizing the generation of greenhouse gases in the United States by the year 2005;

(2) the recommendations made in chapter 9 of the 1991 National Academy of Sciences report entitled "Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming", including an analysis of the benefits and costs of each recommendation;

(3) the extent to which the United States is responding, compared with other countries, to the recommendations made in chapter 9 of the 1991 National Academy of Sciences report;

(4) the feasibility of reducing the generation of greenhouse gases;

(5) the feasibility and economic, energy, social, environmental, and competitive implications, including implications for jobs, of achieving a 20 percent reduction from 1988 levels in the generation of carbon dioxide by the year 2005 as recommended by the 1988 Toronto Scientific World Conference on the Changing Atmosphere;

(6) the potential economic, energy, social, environmental, and competitive implications, including implications for jobs, of implementing the policies necessary to enable the United States to comply with any obligations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change or subsequent international agreements.

(Pub. L. 102–486, title XVI, §1601, Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 2999.)
AMENDMENT
      NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

    


    This
      AMENDMENT
      NO 1. TO EMPLOYMENT
      AGREEMENT
      (this
“Amendment”)
      is
      entered into on and effective for all purposes as of August 6, 2007 by and
      between Glenn Peipert (“Employee”)
      and
      Conversion Services International, Inc. (the “Company”).
      

    


    WHEREAS,
      the
      Company and Employee are parties to that certain Employment Agreement, entered
      into effective as of March 26, 2004 (the “Agreement”);

    


    WHEREAS,
      pursuant to Section 13 of the Agreement, amendments to the Agreement are
      required to be effected pursuant to a writing executed by the Company and
      Employee; and

    


    WHEREAS,
      the
      Company desires, and Employee hereby agrees, to amend the Agreement on the
      terms
      set forth herein.

    


    NOW,
      THEREFORE,
      in
      consideration of Employee’s continued employment with the Company, and for other
      good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which Employee and the Company
      hereby acknowledge, Employee and the Company hereby amend the Agreement as
      follows: 

    


    Section
      3(a) (Salary)is hereby striken in its entirety and shall now state:

    


    “The
      Company shall pay Employee (i) base compensation (the "Salary") for services
      rendered in the amount of Three Hundred Fifteen Thousand ($315,000) per annum
      payable on a semi-monthly basis (which base compensation may be increased by
      the
      Board of Directors of the Company, in its sole discretion), and (ii) annual
      bonus, if any, as may be determined by the Board of Directors of the Company,
      in
      its sole discretion.”

    


    No
      Further Amendment.
      Except
      as amended hereby, the Company and Employee hereby agree that the Agreement
      shall remain unmodfied and in full force and effect.

    


    


    


    [Signature
      Page Follows]


    
      
        
        

      

      
        1

        
          

        

      

      
        
        

      

    


    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF,
      the
      undersigned have executed this Amendment effective as of the date first forth
      above.

    
      	 	 	 
	 	CONVERSION
              SERVICES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
	 
 	 
 	 
 
	 	By:  	/s/ Scott
              Newman
	 	
              

              Name: Scott
                Newman

              Title: Chief
                Executive Officer

            
	 	 
	 	 
	 	/s/ Glenn Peipert
	 	
              

              Glenn
                Peipert

            




    


    
      
         

      

      
        2
No: III-13-042 November 7, 2013

CONTACT: Viktoria Mitlyng 630-829-9662

 Prema Chandrathil 630-829-9663

NRC Regional Office to Discuss Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Basics; 

Webinar to be Held November 14

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Region III office will hold a webinar Nov. 14th to discuss 

how dry spent fuel storage is regulated and inspected to ensure the public and environment are 

protected.

The office, located in Lisle, Ill., will explain our regulations, how dry casks are designed and the 

inspections performed to ensure the fuel is stored safely and securely.

“We remain committed to having discussions about the NRC’s oversight of nuclear power 

plants,” said NRC Region III Administrator Cynthia D. Pederson. “This webinar will give us an 

opportunity to continue the conversation with the public about issues of interest to them.”

The webinar will be held from 5:30-6:30 p.m. EST (4:30-5:30 p.m. CST). Participants will be 

able to view presentation slides prepared by NRC staff and submit questions in writing over the Internet. 

Interested members of the public must register online or follow the instructions on the meeting notice in 

order to participate.