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

[104th Congress Public Law 308]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ308.104]

[[Page 110 STAT. 3814]]

Public Law 104-308
104th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To enhance fairness in compensating owners of patents used by the United 
             States. <<NOTE: Oct. 19, 1996 -  [H.R. 632]>> 

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

SECTION 1. JUST COMPENSATION.

    (a) Amendment.--Section 1498(a) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end of the first paragraph the following: 
``Reasonable and entire compensation shall include the owner's 
reasonable costs, including reasonable fees for expert witnesses and 
attorneys, in pursuing the action if the owner is an independent 
inventor, a nonprofit organization, or an entity that had no more than 
500 employees at any time during the 5-year period preceding the use or 
manufacture of the patented invention by or for the United States. 
Nothwithstanding the preceding sentences, unless the action has been 
pending for more than 10 years from the time of filing to the time that 
the owner applies for such costs and fees, reasonable and entire 
compensation shall not include such costs and fees if the court finds 
that the position of the United States was substantially justified or 
that special circumstances make an award unjust.''.
    (b) Effective <<NOTE: 28 USC 1498 note.>>  Date.--The amendment made 
by subsection (a) shall apply to actions under section 1498(a) of title 
28, United States Code, that are pending on, or brought on or after, the 
date of the enactment of this Act.

    Approved October 19, 1996.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 632:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 104-373 (Comm. on the Judiciary).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:
                                                        Vol. 141 (1995):
                                    Dec. 12, considered and passed 
                                        House.
                                                        Vol. 142 (1996):
                                    Oct. 3, considered and passed 
                                        Senate, amended.
                                    Oct. 4, House concurred in Senate 
                                        amendments.

                                  <all>
```
IIB 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3912 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 29, 2012 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 110 Mastic Road in Mastic Beach, New York, 

as the ‘‘Brigadier General Nathaniel Woodhull Post Office Building’’. 

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


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with 
2 

HR 3912 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. BRIGADIER GENERAL NATHANIEL WOODHULL 

2 POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

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

4 Postal Service located at 110 Mastic Road in Mastic 

5 Beach, New York, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Brigadier General Nathaniel Woodhull Post Office Build7 ing’’. 

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

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

11 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Brigadier General 

12 Nathaniel Woodhull Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 28, 

2012. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with
**MEMORANDUM**

DATE: November 20, 2014 TO: Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket ID: OAR - 2013 -0602 FROM: Rob Lawrence

EPA/Region 6/PD SUBJECT: June 26 , 2014 Presentation to Region 6 Federal Facilities Forum Regarding the

Proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants **SUMMARY** A presentation was made by EPA to the Region 6 Federal Facilities Forum and the a ttendees listed below on June 26 , 2014, to discuss the proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants, which was propose d on June 2, 2014. **ATTENDEES** Participants : General Services Administration, US Army, US Air Force, Postal Service, Federal

Aviation Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Bureau of Prisons EPA Participant : Rob Lawrence (Region 6 Energy Policy Advisor)
#### In the Matter of Derrick Hamilton, Petitioner, v Glenn S. Goord, as Commissioner of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[819 NYS2d 624]

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

Petitioner was charged with violating a prison disciplinary rule prohibiting inmates from using controlled substances unless prescribed by health services providers, after a sample of his urine twice tested positive for cannabinoids. Following a tier III disciplinary hearing held in his absence, petitioner was found guilty of the charge. On administrative appeal, respondent modified the penalty and otherwise upheld the determination. *643Petitioner thereafter commenced, this proceeding challenging the determination. *

We find that petitioner knowingly waived his right to be present at the hearing when he refused to attend despite being afforded the opportunity, and having been fully informed by the Hearing Officer both that any concerns would be addressed at the hearing and regarding the consequences of his refusal *(see People v Ahmed,*66 NY2d 307, 311 [1985], citing *Johnson v Zerbst,*304 US 458, 464-465 [1938]; *Matter of Johnson v Racette,*282 AD2d 899, 899-900 [2001]; *Matter of Joyce v Goord,*246 AD2d 926, 927 [1998]). Petitioner also failed to preserve the claims that he now advances which should have been raised at the hearing *(see*CPL 470.05 [2]). “Unpreserved issues are not issues of law” subject to our judicial review in a CPLR article 78 proceeding *(Matter of Khan v New York State Dept. of Health,*96 NY2d 879, 880 [2001]; *see Matter of Featherstone v Franco,*95 NY2d 550, 554 [2000]), as “the Appellate Division ha [s] no discretionary authority or interest of justice jurisdiction” *(Matter of Khan v New York State Dept. Health, supra*at 880) to review unpreserved issues in such special proceedings. Accordingly, we will not review petitioner’s claims.

Mercure, J.P., Spain, Carpinello, Mugglin and Kane, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

*

 Although it does not appear that petitioner raised a question of substantial evidence and, therefore, the proceeding should not have been transferred to this Court, we nevertheless retain jurisdiction in the interest of judicial economy (see *Matter of Otero v Goord, 17*AD3d 805, 806 n [2005]).
### §1397m–4. Report

Not later than October 1, 2014, the Secretary shall submit to the Elder Justice Coordinating Council established under section 1397k of this title, the Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on Finance of the Senate a report—

(1) compiling, summarizing, and analyzing the information contained in the State reports submitted under subsections (b)(4) and (c)(4) 1 of section 1397m–1 of this title; and

(2) containing such recommendations for legislative or administrative action as the Secretary determines to be appropriate.

(Aug. 14, 1935, ch. 531, title XX, §2045, as added Pub. L. 111–148, title VI, §6703(a)(1)(C), Mar. 23, 2010, 124 Stat. 797.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Subsection (c)(4) of section 1397m–1 of this title, referred to in par. (1), was redesignated subsec. (c)(5) by Pub. L. 115–70, title V, §501(3), Oct. 18, 2017, 131 Stat. 1215.

1 See References in Text note below.
### §14921. Accreditation or approval required in order to provide adoption services in cases subject to the Convention

#### (a) In general

Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, no person may offer or provide adoption services in connection with a Convention adoption in the United States unless that person—

(1) is accredited or approved in accordance with this subchapter; or

(2) is providing such services through or under the supervision and responsibility of an accredited agency or approved person.

#### (b) Exceptions

Subsection (a) shall not apply to the following:

#### (1) Background studies and home studies

The performance of a background study on a child or a home study on a prospective adoptive parent, or any report on any such study by a social work professional or organization who is not providing any other adoption service in the case, if the background or home study is approved by an accredited agency.

#### (2) Child welfare services

The provision of a child welfare service by a person who is not providing any other adoption service in the case.

#### (3) Legal services

The provision of legal services by a person who is not providing any adoption service in the case.

#### (4) Prospective adoptive parents acting on own behalf

The conduct of a prospective adoptive parent on his or her own behalf in the case, to the extent not prohibited by the law of the State in which the prospective adoptive parent resides.

(Pub. L. 106–279, title II, §201, Oct. 6, 2000, 114 Stat. 830.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This subchapter, referred to in subsec. (a), was in the original "this title", meaning title II of Pub. L. 106–279, Oct. 6, 2000, 114 Stat. 830, which is classified principally to this subchapter. For complete classification of title II to the Code, see Tables.

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective upon entry into force for the United States of the Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption, pursuant to Article 46(2)(a) of the Convention, with transition rule, see section 505(a)(2), (b) of Pub. L. 106–279, set out as an Effective Dates; Transition Rule note under section 14901 of this title.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION**

**CERTIFICATION BY THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

 

I, C. William Hosler, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Catellus Development Corporation;

 

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

 

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

 

4. Catellus Development Corporation’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for Catellus Development Corporation and have: 

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed underour supervision, to ensure that material information relating to Catellus Development Corporation, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared; 

 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of CatellusDevelopment Corporation’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and 

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change inCatellus Development Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during Catellus Development Corporation’s most recent fiscal quarter (Catellus Development Corporation’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Catellus Development Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

 

5. Catellus Development Corporation’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting, to Catellus Development Corporation’s auditors and the Audit Committee of Catellus Development Corporation’s Board of Directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect Catellus Development Corporation’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in Catellus Development Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: November 8, 2004
### **CHAPTER 147—PRISON RAPE ELIMINATION**

Sec.
15601 to 15609. Transferred.
### §13992. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 13992 was editorially reclassified as section 12372 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 133 (Wednesday, July 11, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 40914]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16903]

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

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

Arts and Artifacts Indemnity Panel Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Federal Council on the Arts and the Humanities, National 
Endowment for the Humanities, National Foundation on the Arts and the 
Humanities.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given that the Federal Council on 
the Arts and the Humanities will hold a meeting of the Arts and 
Artifacts Domestic Indemnity Panel. The purpose of the meeting is for 
panel review, discussion, evaluation, and recommendation of 
applications for Certificates of Indemnity submitted to the Federal 
Council on the Arts and the Humanities for exhibitions beginning after 
October 1, 2012.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Monday, August 6, 2012, from 9 a.m. 
to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Old Post Office Building, 
1100 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20506, in Room 730.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisette Voyatzis, Committee Management 
Officer, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Room 529, Washington, DC 20506, 
or call (202) 606-8322. Hearing-impaired individuals are advised that 
information on this matter may be obtained by contacting the National 
Endowment for the Humanities' TDD terminal at (202) 606-8282.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Because the meeting will consider 
proprietary financial and commercial data provided in confidence by 
indemnity applicants, and material that is likely to disclose trade 
secrets or other privileged or confidential information, and because it 
is important to keep the values of objects to be indemnified, and the 
methods of transportation and security measures confidential, the 
meetings will be closed to the public pursuant to section 552b(c)(4) of 
Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. I have made this determination under the 
authority granted me by the Chairman's Delegation of Authority to Close 
Advisory Committee Meetings dated July 19, 1993.

    Dated: July 6, 2012.
Lisette Voyatzis,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012-16903 Filed 7-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7536-01-P
```
#### Minnie Eacker et al., Respondents, v. Incorporated Village of Garden City, Appellant.

No opinion. Carswell, Acting P. J., Adel, Sneed, Wenzel and Mac Crate, JJ., concur.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CATALINA JIMENEZ CASTILLO,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-73635

Agency No. A095-291-755

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 17, 2012** 

Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

Catalina Jimenez Castillo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal

from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for cancellation of

removal, and declining to reinstate her voluntary departure period. We have

FILED

JUL 23 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-73635

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the

agency’s continuous physical presence finding. Landin-Zavala v. Gonzales, 488

F.3d 1150, 1151 (9th Cir. 2007). We deny in part and grant in part the petition for

review, and remand for further proceedings.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Jimenez Castillo

failed to establish the requisite continuous physical presence for cancellation of

removal where her testimony conflicted with the affidavits she submitted regarding

presence. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A), (d)(1).

As the government acknowledges, the record contains evidence that Jimenez

Castillo timely filed proof of posting her voluntary departure bond. See 8 C.F.R. 

§ 1240.26(c)(3)(ii). We therefore remand to the BIA to determine Jimenez

Castillo’s eligibility for reinstatement of voluntary departure. 

Jimenez Castillo’s remaining contentions are unavailing.

The parties will bear their own costs for this petition to review.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; GRANTED in part;

REMANDED.
**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, 2006       /s/ Bruce Harris   Name:  Bruce Harris   Title:  Chief Financial Officer, VW Credit, Inc.
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, John J. Sherman, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Inergy Holdings, L.P. (the “registrant”); 

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

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

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, includingits consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared: 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and present in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end ofthe period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: May 10, 2006 

 

 

44