alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT LUIS ALB ER TO GUILLEN-C OREA, Pe titione r, v. LORETTA E. LYNC H, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde n t . No. 13-73531 Age n c y No. A098-992-660 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d

Nove m b e r 18, 2015 ** B e fore : TASHIM A , OW ENS, a nd FRIEDLAND, C irc uit Judge s. Luis Albe rto Guille n-C ore a , a native and c itiz e n of Hondura s, pe t itions for re vie w of the B oa

rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ (“ B IA” ) orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from an im m igration judge ’ s de nia l of his re que s t for a c ontinua nc e , a nd de ny ing a m otion to re m and. W e have j urisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for 

# FIL ED N OV 25 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).a

buse o f disc re tion the de n i a l of a c ontinua nc e an d the de nia l of a

m otion to re m and. Malilia v . Holde r, 632 F.3d 598, 602 (9th C ir. 2011); Rome ro-Ruiz v . Muk ase y , 538 F.3d 1057, 1062 (9th C ir. 2008). W e de ny in pa rt a n d dism iss in pa rt the pe tition for re vie w. The a ge n c y

did not a b u se its disc re tion in de ny ing Guillen-C ore a ’ s re que st for a fifth c ontinua

nc e whe re the re wa s no pe nding I-130 visa pe tition a t the tim e of the c ontinua

nc e re que s t a

nd Guille n-C o re a ’ s first I-130 ha d be e n de nie d. Se e Matte r of Hashmi, 24 I. & N. De c . 785, 790-92 (B IA 2009) (listing fac tors to c onside r whe n de te rm ining if a c ontinua nc e is wa rrante d whe n a n I-130 pe tition is pe nding, inc luding thevia b ility of the pe tition a

nd pre vious de nia ls (e m

pha sis a dde d)); c f. Malilia, 632 F.3d a

t 606-07 (a

pply ing Hashmi

fa c tors). The B IA did not a

buse its disc re tion in de ny ing the m otion to re m and whe re Guille n-C ore a

provide d no supporting e v ide nc e to prove the via

b ility of his se c ond I-130 pe tition. Se e 8 C .F.R . § 1003.2(c )(1). W e la c k jurisdic tion to c onside r Guille n-C ore a ’ s re que st for prose c utoria l disc re tion. Se eVilc hiz-Soto v . Holde r, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th C i r. 2012) (orde r). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D in par t; DISM ISSE D in par t.

1 3 - 7 3 5 3 1 2
No: 16-070 December 1, 2016

Contact: David McIntyre, 301-415-8200

NRC Approves Transfer of Susquehanna Nuclear Plant Licenses from 

Talen Energy to Riverstone Holdings

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved the indirect transfer of the operating licenses 

for the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, from Talen Energy Corp. to the portfolio 

companies of Riverstone Holdings, as part of Riverstone’s proposed acquisition of Talen.

The Susquehanna plant has two boiling water reactors and a dry cask spent fuel storage 

installation located in Berwick, Pa. The reactors are licensed to operate through July 17, 2042, for Unit 

1 and March 23, 2044, for Unit 2. The plant is operated by a subsidiary of Talen, Susquehanna Nuclear 

LLC, which holds a 90-percent ownership stake in the plant. The indirect transfer does not affect the 

remaining 10 percent, held by Allegheny Electric Cooperative Inc.

“Indirect transfer” refers to the formation or change of a holding company over an existing 

licensee.

The proposed indirect transfer of control is not expected to change Susquehanna Nuclear’s role 

as the plant operator, its principal officers, managers or staff or the day-to-day management and 

operation of the units. No changes will be made to the units or their licensing bases as a result of the 

transfer.

The NRC reviews proposed license transfers to ensure the new ownership entity will have the 

technical and financial ability to operate the plant safely and eventually decommission it. The NRC 

concluded that Riverstone is qualified to hold the ownership interests in the facility previously held by 

Talen, and that Susquehanna Nuclear remains qualified to operate the plant.

The NRC’s approval of the indirect license transfer, contained in an Order issued Nov. 30, is 

effective immediately. Other regulatory approvals may be required before the transaction is completed.
### §§2456 to 2459. Repealed. Pub. L. 111–314, §6, Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3444

Section 2456, Pub. L. 85–568, title III, §304(e), July 29, 1958, 72 Stat. 435, related to permission to use firearms. See section 20133 of Title 51, National and Commercial Space Programs.

Section 2456a, Pub. L. 85–568, title III, §304(f), as added Pub. L. 100–685, title II, §206, Nov. 17, 1988, 102 Stat. 4090, related to arrest authority. See section 20134 of Title 51.

Section 2457, Pub. L. 85–568, title III, §305, July 29, 1958, 72 Stat. 435; Pub. L. 96–517, §7(b), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3027; Pub. L. 97–96, §7, Dec. 21, 1981, 95 Stat. 1210; Pub. L. 97–164, title I, §162(3), Apr. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 49; Pub. L. 98–622, title II, §205(c), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3388; Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, §1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4732(b)(20)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–585, related to property rights in inventions. See section 20135 of Title 51.

Section 2458, Pub. L. 85–568, title III, §306, July 29, 1958, 72 Stat. 437, related to contributions awards. See section 20136 of Title 51.

Section 2458a, Pub. L. 85–568, title III, §307, as added Pub. L. 94–464, §3, Oct. 8, 1976, 90 Stat. 1988, related to malpractice and negligence suits against United States. See section 20137 of Title 51.

Section 2458b, Pub. L. 85–568, title III, §308, as added Pub. L. 96–48, §6(b)(2), Aug. 8, 1979, 93 Stat. 348, related to insurance and indemnification. See section 20138 of Title 51.

Section 2458c, Pub. L. 85–568, title III, §309, formerly title III, as added Pub. L. 106–74, title IV, §435(a), Oct. 20, 1999, 113 Stat. 1097; designated §309 and amended Pub. L. 106–391, title III, §324(a)(2), (b), Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1599, 1600; Pub. L. 109–155, title VII, §702, Dec. 30, 2005, 119 Stat. 2936, related to experimental aerospace vehicle. See section 20139 of Title 51.

Section 2459, Pub. L. 85–568, title III, §310, formerly §307, July 29, 1958, 72 Stat. 438; Pub. L. 88–113, §6, Sept. 6, 1963, 77 Stat. 144; renumbered §308, Pub. L. 94–464, §3, Oct. 8, 1976, 90 Stat. 1988; renumbered §309, Pub. L. 96–48, §6(b)(1), Aug. 8, 1979, 93 Stat. 348; renumbered §310, Pub. L. 106–391, title III, §324(a)(1), Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1599, related to appropriations. See section 20140 of Title 51.
### §2000e–3. Other unlawful employment practices

#### (a) Discrimination for making charges, testifying, assisting, or participating in enforcement proceedings

It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discriminate against any of his employees or applicants for employment, for an employment agency, or joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on-the-job training programs, to discriminate against any individual, or for a labor organization to discriminate against any member thereof or applicant for membership, because he has opposed any practice made an unlawful employment practice by this subchapter, or because he has made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under this subchapter.

#### (b) Printing or publication of notices or advertisements indicating prohibited preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination; occupational qualification exception

It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer, labor organization, employment agency, or joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on-the-job training programs, to print or publish or cause to be printed or published any notice or advertisement relating to employment by such an employer or membership in or any classification or referral for employment by such a labor organization, or relating to any classification or referral for employment by such an employment agency, or relating to admission to, or employment in, any program established to provide apprenticeship or other training by such a joint labor-management committee, indicating any preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination, based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, except that such a notice or advertisement may indicate a preference, limitation, specification, or discrimination based on religion, sex, or national origin when religion, sex, or national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification for employment.

(Pub. L. 88–352, title VII, §704, July 2, 1964, 78 Stat. 257; Pub. L. 92–261, §8(c), Mar. 24, 1972, 86 Stat. 109.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1972—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 92–261, §8(c)(1), inserted provision making it an unlawful employment practice for a joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on-the-job training programs, to discriminate against the specified individuals.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 92–261, §8(c)(2), inserted provisions making prohibitions applicable to joint labor-management committees controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining, including on-the-job training programs, and notices or advertisements of such joint labor-management committees relating to admission to, or employment in, any program established to provide apprenticeship or other training.
#### § 38.1150 Core Principle 22.

The board of trade, if a publicly traded company, shall endeavor to recruit individuals to serve on the board of directors and the other decision-making bodies (as determined by the Commission) of the board of trade from among, and to have the composition of the bodies reflect, a broad and culturally diverse pool of qualified candidates.
###### Editorial Note on Part 240

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 240 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

#### § 240.14f-1 Change in majority of directors.

If, pursuant to any arrangement or understanding with the person or persons acquiring securities in a transaction subject to section 13(d) or 14(d) of the Act, any persons are to be elected or designated as directors of the issuer, otherwise than at a meeting of security holders, and the persons so elected or designated will constitute a majority of the directors of the issuer, then, not less than 10 days prior to the date any such person take office as a director, or such shorter period prior to that date as the Commission may authorize upon a showing of good cause therefor, the issuer shall file with the Commission and transmit to all holders of record of securities of the issuer who would be entitled to vote at a meeting for election of directors, information substantially equivalent to the information which would be required by Items 6 (a), (d) and (e), 7 and 8 of Schedule 14A of Regulation 14A (§ 240.14a-101 of this chapter) to be transmitted if such person or persons were nominees for election as directors at a meeting of such security holders. Eight copies of such information shall be filed with the Commission.

[33 FR 11017, Aug. 2, 1968, as amended at 34 FR 6101, Apr. 4, 1969; 51 FR 42072, Nov. 20, 1986]
The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the Western *

District of Arkansas, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 98-2365EM

_____________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern

v. * District of Missouri.

*

Stephen Jones, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

_____________

 Submitted: November 17, 1998

Filed: November 27, 1998 

_____________

Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD and FAGG, Circuit Judges, and DAWSON, District *

Judge.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted Stephen Jones of possession of cocaine base with the intent to

distribute. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (1994). Jones appeals, contending first that the

district court committed error by overruling Jones’s motion for acquittal at the close of

the Government’s case because the evidence was insufficient to prove Jones intended

to distribute the cocaine base in his possession at the time of his arrest. Jones failed to

renew his motion for acquittal at the close of all the evidence, and we thus review his
-2-

contention for plain error. See United States v. Wadena, 152 F.3d 831, 853 (8th Cir.

1998). The Government presented expert testimony that the amount of cocaine base

Jones possessed far exceeded an amount attributable to personal use and that the

packaging was consistent with distribution. This evidence, viewed in the light most

favorable to the Government, is sufficient to support the jury’s finding that Jones

intended to distribute the cocaine base. See United States v. Smith, 91 F.3d 1199, 1200-

01 (8th Cir. 1996). Thus, the district court did not commit error, plain or otherwise, in

overruling Jones’s motion for acquittal.

Second, Jones contends the district court improperly admitted evidence of Jones’s

two earlier drug-related convictions because the prejudicial effect of this evidence

outweighed its probative value. See Fed. R. Evid. 403. The district court did not abuse

its discretion in admitting evidence of these earlier convictions to demonstrate

knowledge and intent and minimized any prejudicial impact by giving the jury an

appropriate limiting instruction. See United States v. Perkins, 94 F.3d 429, 435-36 (8th

Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 1004 (1997).

We affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
```

[115th Congress Public Law 355]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 5075]]

Public Law 115-355
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
    116 Main Street in Dansville, New York, as the ``Staff Sergeant 
   Alexandria Gleason-Morrow Post Office Building''. <<NOTE: Dec. 21, 
                         2018 -  [H.R. 5395]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT ALEXANDRIA GLEASON-MORROW POST OFFICE 
                              BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 116 Main Street in Dansville, New York, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Staff Sergeant Alexandria Gleason-Morrow Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Staff 
Sergeant Alexandria Gleason-Morrow Post Office Building''.

    Approved December 21, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5395:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018):
            Nov. 29, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 12, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Lastmor Products Mfg. Corp. et al., Respondents, and Zendel Storozum, Appellant.

The possible disqualification of one of the three arbitrators, on the ground of his interest in the outcome of the proceeding, was waived. The record does not establish other grounds for, vacating the award. Carswell, Acting P. J., Johnston, Adel, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Luz Rivera, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 202]

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John E Collins, J.), rendered March 31, 2005, convicting defendant, upon her plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing her, as a second felony offender, to a term of 41⁄2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

After conducting a hearing, the court properly imposed an enhanced sentence based upon defendant’s violation of the terms of a plea agreement that required her to complete a drug treatment program. The evidence established that defendant was placed in a suitable program, and that her failure to abide by the plea agreement was entirely within her control *(compare People v Feliciano,*14 AD3d 308 [2005]; *People v Jimenez,*307 AD2d 880 [2003]). Concur — Buckley, P.J., Saxe, Williams, Sweeny and Malone, JJ.
###### Editorial Note on Part 249

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 249 appear at 57 FR 36501, Aug. 13, 1992, and 57 FR 47409, Oct. 16, 1992.

#### § 249.208 [Reserved]

###### Editorial Note on Subpart C of Part 249

#### Editorial Note:

Amended Form 8-A replaces former Form 8-C; see § 249.208a of this chapter.
§ 275.203A-3 Definitions. For purposes of section 203A of the Act (15 U.S.C. 80b-3a) and the rules thereunder: ( a ) ( 1 ) *Investment adviser representative.* “Investment adviser representative” of an investment adviser means a supervised person of the investment adviser: ( i ) Who has more than five clients who are natural persons (other than excepted persons described in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section); and
( ii ) More than ten percent of whose clients are natural persons (other than excepted persons described in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section).
( 2 ) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(1) of this section, a supervised person is not an investment adviser representative if the supervised person: ( i ) Does not on a regular basis solicit, meet with, or otherwise communicate with clients of the investment adviser; or
( ii ) Provides only impersonal investment advice.
( 3 ) For purposes of this section: ( i ) “Excepted person” means a natural person who is a qualified client as described in § 275.205-3(d)(1).
( ii ) “Impersonal investment advice” means investment advisory services provided by means of written material or oral statements that do not purport to meet the objectives or needs of specific individuals or accounts.
( 4 ) Supervised persons may rely on the definition of “client” in § 275.202(a)(30)-1 to identify clients for purposes of paragraph (a)(1) of this section, except that supervised persons need not count clients that are not residents of the United States.
( b ) *Place of business.* “Place of business” of an investment adviser representative means: ( 1 ) An office at which the investment adviser representative regularly provides investment advisory services, solicits, meets with, or otherwise communicates with clients; and
( 2 ) Any other location that is held out to the general public as a location at which the investment adviser representative provides investment advisory services, solicits, meets with, or otherwise communicates with clients.
( c ) *Principal office and place of business.* “Principal office and place of business” of an investment adviser means the executive office of the investment adviser from which the officers, partners, or managers of the investment adviser direct, control, and coordinate the activities of the investment adviser.
( d ) *Assets under management.* Determine “assets under management” by calculating the securities portfolios with respect to which an investment adviser provides continuous and regular supervisory or management services as reported on the investment adviser's Form ADV (17 CFR 279.1).
( e ) *State securities authority.* “State securities authority” means the securities commissioner or commission (or any agency, office or officer performing like functions) of any State.
[62 FR 28134, May 22, 1997, as amended at 63 FR 39715, July 24, 1998; 69 FR 72088, Dec. 10, 2004; 76 FR 43012, July 19, 2011]
### §19064. Biological research collections

#### (a) In general

The Director shall continue to support databases, tools, methods, and other activities that secure and improve existing physical and digital biological research collections, improve the accessibility of collections and collection-related data for research and educational purposes, develop capacity for curation and collection management, and to transfer ownership of collections that are significant to the biological research community, including to museums and universities.

#### (b) Specimen management plan

In consultation with other relevant Federal research agencies, and as the Director determines is appropriate, the Director shall require that proposals submitted to the Foundation for funding for research that involves collecting or generating specimens include, as part of the data management plan under section 19053 of this title, a description of how the specimens and associated data will be accessioned into and maintained in an established biological collection.

#### (c) Action Center for Biological Collections

In coordination with other relevant Federal research agencies, as appropriate, the Director shall make awards on a competitive basis to institutions of higher education or non-profit organizations (or consortia of such institutions or organizations) to facilitate coordination and data sharing among communities of practice for research, education, workforce training, evaluation, and business model development, including by establishing an Action Center for Biological Collections.

(Pub. L. 117–167, div. B, title III, §10355, Aug. 9, 2022, 136 Stat. 1562.)
§ 1006.940 Disqualified. *Disqualified* means that a person is prohibited from participating in specified Federal procurement or nonprocurement transactions as required under a statute, Executive order (other than Executive Orders 12549 and 12689) or other authority. Examples of disqualifications include persons prohibited under— ( a ) The Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276(a));
( b ) The equal employment opportunity acts and Executive orders; or
( c ) The Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7606), Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1368) and Executive Order 11738 (3 CFR, 1973 Comp., p. 799).
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# SECY-15-0047:  Request for Approval of Staff Recommendation to Auth. San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station and Diablo Canyon Power Plant to Use Section 161A Preemption Authority

Accession Number: ML15050A519

Date Released: Tuesday, January 12, 2016

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.
    - ML15050A514 - SECY-15-0047: Request for Approval of Staff Recommendation to Authorize San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station and Diablo Canyon Power Plant to Use Section 161A Preemption Authority (4 page(s), 3/31/2015)
    - ML15050A290 - SECY-15-0047: Enclosure 1 - Request for Approval of Staff Recommendation to Authorize San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station and Diablo Canyon Power Plant to Use Section 161A Preemption Authority (9 page(s), 3/31/2015)
    - ML15027A288 - SECY-15-0047: Enclosure 2 - Request for Approval of Staff Recommendation to Authorize San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station and Diablo Canyon Power Plant to Use Section 161A Preemption Authority (11 page(s), 3/31/2015)
    - ML15050A286 - SECY-15-0047: Enclosure 3 - Request for Approval of Staff Recommendation to Authorize San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station and Diablo Canyon Power Plant to Use Section 161A Preemption Authority (8 page(s), 3/31/2015)
    - ML15029A221 - SECY-15-0047:  Enclosure 4 - Request for Approval of Staff Recommendation to Authorize San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station and Diablo Canyon Power Plant to Use Section 161A Preemption Authority (11 page(s), 3/31/2015)
    - ML15050A293 - SECY-15-0047:  Enclosure 5, Draft California Governor Letter-Grant 02-18-15.docx (2 page(s), 3/31/2015)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer