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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

# AGENCY:

Department of Defense.

# ACTION:

Notice of Advisory Committee Meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Defense Science Board Task Force on Mobility will meet in closed session on January 12, 2005, in Arlington, VA. This Task Force will identify the acquisition issues in improving our strategic mobility capabilities.

The mission of the Defense Science Board is to advise the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology & Logistics on scientific and technical matters as they affect the perceived needs of the Department of Defense. At this meeting, the Defense Science Board Task Force will review: The part transport plays in our present-day military capability—the technical strengths and weakness the operational opportunities and constraints; the possible advantage of better alignment of current assets with those in production and those to be delivered in the very near future; how basing and deployment strategies—CONUS-basing, repositioning (ashore or afloat), and seabasing—drive our mobility effectiveness; the possible advantages available from new transport technologies and systems whose expected IOC dates are either short term (~12 years) or, separately, the long term (~25 years).

In accordance with Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. 2), it has been determined that this Defense Science Board Task Force meeting concerns matters listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) and that, accordingly, the meeting will be closed to the public.

Dated: December 6, 2004.

Jeannette Owings-Ballard,

OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 04-27122  Filed 12-9-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Isidore Goldman, Appellant.

*762No opinion. Present — Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ.
### §254s. Native Hawaiian Health Scholarships

#### (a) Eligibility

Subject to the availability of funds appropriated under the authority of subsection (d), the Secretary shall provide funds to Papa Ola Lokahi for the purpose of providing scholarship assistance to students who—

(1) meet the requirements of section 254l(b) of this title, and

(2) are Native Hawaiians.

#### (b) Terms and conditions

(1) The scholarship assistance provided under subsection (a) shall be provided under the same terms and subject to the same conditions, regulations, and rules that apply to scholarship assistance provided under section 254l of this title.

(2) The Native Hawaiian Health Scholarship program shall not be administered by or through the Indian Health Service.

#### (c) "Native Hawaiian" defined

For purposes of this section, the term "Native Hawaiian" means any individual who is—

(1) a citizen of the United States,

(2) a resident of the State of Hawaii, and

(3) a descendant of the aboriginal people, who prior to 1778, occupied and exercised sovereignty in the area that now constitutes the State of Hawaii, as evidenced by—

(A) genealogical records,

(B) Kupuna (elders) or Kama'aina (long-term community residents) verification, or

(C) birth records of the State of Hawaii.

#### (d) Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated $1,800,000 for each of the fiscal years 1990, 1991, and 1992 for the purpose of funding the scholarship assistance provided under subsection (a).

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title III, §338K, formerly §338J, as added Pub. L. 100–713, title I, §106, Nov. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 4787; renumbered §338K, Pub. L. 101–597, title III, §302, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 3032; amended Pub. L. 101–644, title IV, §401, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4668; Pub. L. 107–116, title V, §514(b), Jan. 10, 2002, 115 Stat. 2220.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2002—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–116, which directed the amendment of subsec. (a) by substituting "Papa Ola Lokahi" for "Kamehameha School/Bishop Estate", was executed by making the substitution for "Kamehameha Schools/Bishop Estate" to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

1990—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 101–644, which directed the general amendment of subsec. (a) of section 338J of the Public Health Service Act, was executed to subsec. (a) of this section, to reflect the probable intent of Congress and the intervening renumbering of section 338J as 338K by Pub. L. 101–597. Prior to amendment, subsec. (a) read as follows: "Subject to the availability of funds appropriated under the authority of subsection (d) of this section, the Secretary shall provide scholarship assistance, pursuant to a contract with the Kamehameha Schools/Bishop Estate, to students who—

"(1) meet the requirements of section 254l(b) of this title, and

"(2) are Native Hawaiians."
#### § 301.0-1 Availability of forms.

The forms prescribed for use under the Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970, as amended, (the “Act”) and under part 300 of this chapter are identified and described in this part. Copies of these forms may be obtained upon request to, as appropriate, the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”) at 900 Seventeenth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006, or the trustee appointed in a liquidation proceeding under section 5 of the Act.
#### RHODES REFRIGERATION, INC., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.

Civ. No. 66-357.

United States District Court D. Oregon.

June 15, 1968.

Frank E. Magee, Portland, Or., for plaintiff.

Sidney I. Lezak, U. S. Atty., Portland, Or., Jerome Fink, Edward O. C. Ord, Attys., Dept of Justice, Washington, D. C., for defendant.

OPINION

SOLOMON, Chief Judge:

Rhodes Refrigeration, Inc., seeks a refund of excise taxes imposed on “household type refrigerators.” Int.Rev.Code of 1954, § 4111.1 The United States counterclaims for additional excise taxes.

From April 1, 1960, to March 31, 1964, Rhodes manufactured and sold 5997 model U-171-C (17 cubic feet) and model U-211-C (21 cubic feet) freezers. Section 4111 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 imposes a 5 per cent manufacturer’s excise tax on “household type refrigerators.” The sole issue in this action is whether these 17 and 21 cubic foot freezers are “household type” refrigerators.

The term “household type” is not defined in the statute. However, the regulations define “household type” refrigerators as refrigerators which have “ * * * an actual, practical, commercial fitness, or are specifically designed and constructed, for household use * * 26 C.F.R. § 48.4111-2(a) (D.

Under this definition, Rhodes’ 17 and 21 cubic foot freezers are taxable. The freezers have an actual, practical, commercial fitness for household use. Rhodes sold 1540 of these freezers to food clubs. Almost all of these freezers were resold for home use. In addition, Rhodes advertised and sold freezers directly to individuals for home use. Over 90 per cent of the freezers not sold to food clubs are used in homes.

Rhodes contends that the freezers were designed and constructed for commercial use and that design and construction determine taxability. There is no merit in this contention. Whirlwind Manufacturing Company v. United States, 344 F.2d 153 (5th Cir. 1965). In *Whirlwind,*the taxpayer contended that *351it manufactured “industrial” fans and sought refund of an excise tax imposed on “household type” fans. The Court held that a regulation identical to that involved in this action was a reasonable and correct interpretation of the statute.

26 C.F.R. § 48.4111 — 2(a) (1) is a correct interpretation of Section 4111. Whether a freezer is a “household type” freezer is properly determined by use *or*design.

In any event, practically all of Rhodes’ freezers are used in homes. Freezers that are principally used in homes are “household type” freezers irrespective of what the manufacturer labels them.

Rhodes’ 17 and 21 cubic foot freezers are “household type” refrigerators subject to the excise tax.

The parties stipulated that they could compute and agree upon the amount of any tax due. The United States is directed to prepare a judgment for the proper amount.

This opinion shall constitute findings of fact and conclusions of law under Rule 52(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

1

. Section 4111 was repealed effective June 22, 1965. Pub.L. 89—44, 79 Stat. 139.
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Samuel Gallegos v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01

- 16

- 00885

- CR; 01

- 16

- 00886

- CR

Trial court case number: 1452140; 1452142

Trial court: 184th District Court of Harris County

The clerk’s records in these causes were marked “Confidential Clerk’s Record

, ” although there is no trial court order requiring the sealing of the record. Nevertheless, the clerk’s records were filed in this court by the tr ial court clerk as “sealed” records. Appellant has filed a motion

to “order the trial court to make available all seal ed records for inspection” by appellant’s

counsel

. There is no apparent reason why appellant’s counsel should be denied access to the

cle rk’s record. If the State contends that appellant’s counsel should not have access to the record, or if the State contends that some other procedure should be followed, it is ordered to file a response in opposition to appellant’s motion no later than Marc h 3, 2017. If no response in opposition is filed by March 3, t he clerk of this court is ordered to make the clerk’s records in these appeals available to all counsel of record effective March 6, 2017, and the deadlines for the filing of appellant’s brief s hall run from that date. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 2; cf. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(a)(1).

All counsel are admonished to follow Appellate Rule 9.10 with regard to privacy protection for documents they may file.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Michael Massengale

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: February 24, 2017
§ 1203.735-206 Economic and financial activities of employees abroad. ( a ) *Prohibitions in any foreign country.* A U.S. citizen employee abroad is specifically prohibited from engaging in the activities listed below in any foreign country. ( 1 ) Speculation in currency exchange.
( 2 ) Transactions at exchange rates differing from local legally available rates, unless such transactions are duly authorized in advance by the agency.
( 3 ) Sales to unauthorized persons (whether at cost or for profit) of currency acquired at preferential rates through diplomatic or other restricted arrangements.
( 4 ) Transactions which entail the use, without official sanction, of the diplomatic pouch.
( 5 ) Transfers of funds on behalf of blocked nationals, or otherwise in violation of U.S. foreign funds and assets control.
( 6 ) Independent and unsanctioned private transactions which involve an employee as an individual in violation of applicable control regulations of foreign governments.
( 7 ) Acting as an intermediary in the transfer of private funds from persons in one country to persons in another country, including the United States.
( 8 ) Permitting use of one's official title in any private business transactions or in advertisements for business purposes.
( b ) - ( c ) [Reserved]
( d ) *Business activities of non-U.S. citizen employees.* A non-U.S citizen employee abroad may engage in outside business activities with the prior approval of the head of the overseas establishment on the basis of the standards expressed in § 1203.735-204(a).
EXHIBIT 32.1CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002In connection with the Report of Across America Real Estate Corp. (the“Company”) on Form 10-QSB as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission(the “Report”), I, Ann L. Schmitt , Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.        MAY 14, 2007 /s/ Ann L. Schmitt        Ann L. Schmitt        Chief Executive Officer
§ 134.7 Rulemaking on maximum rates for attorney fees. ( a ) If warranted by an increase in the cost of living or by special circumstances (such as limited availability of attorneys qualified to handle certain types of proceedings), the Department of State may adopt regulations providing that attorney fees may be awarded at a rate higher than $75 per hour in some or all of the types of proceedings covered by this part. The Department of State will conduct any rulemaking proceedings for this purpose under the informal rulemaking procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act.
( b ) Any person may request the Department of State to initiate a rulemaking proceeding to increase the maximum rate for attorney fees. The request should identify the rate the person believes the Department of State should establish and the types of proceedings in which the rate should be used. It should also explain fully the reasons why the higher rate is warranted. The Department of State will respond to the request within 60 days after it is filed, by determining to initiate a rulemaking proceeding, denying the request, or taking other appropriate action.
### Oil Drilling Robert Bond to: Nick Parsons 08/02/2010 03:13 PM

Dear Mr. Parsons,

We in our family have been long time residents of SaLt Lake City having moved here in 1971. We are becoming increasingly concerned about the degraded quality of air in our city . Because of that we are not in favor of increased drilling for oil in our state or in Colorado. It is our firm persuasion that we need to be seeking ways to reduce our oil consumption rather that promoting increased use .

Also, we are disturbed about the considerable negative effects of drilling on the environment.

We DO NOT CONDONE FURTHER OIL DRILLING THAT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO DECREASING OUR AIR QUALITY.

Thank you.
Georgene Bond, RN
Robert E. Bond, MD
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court

generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order

and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

OCT 2 1997

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

LEE R. PHILLIPS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

GEORGE P. ELDER; MARILYN S.

HUTTON, Assistant U.S. Attorney,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 97-2094

(D.C. No. CIV 97-193 SC/LFG)

(D. N.M.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before ANDERSON, BARRETT, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore

ordered submitted without oral argument.
-2-

Plaintiff Lee R. Phillips, appearing pro se, appeals the district court’s order

dismissing her complaint seeking warrants for defendants’ arrest based on their

roles as attorneys for the Air Force and the United States Government in a prior

civil action brought by plaintiff. The district court held that plaintiff lacked

standing to initiate a criminal prosecution against another. We affirm.

We review de novo the district court’s order of dismissal with prejudice for

lack of standing. See United States v. Colorado Supreme Court, 87 F.3d 1161,

1164 (10th Cir. 1996). Plaintiff, as the party invoking federal jurisdiction, bears

the burden to establish standing. See id. Therefore, she must show that (1) she

has suffered an injury in fact, (2) there exists a causal connection between the

injury and defendants’ conduct, and (3) it is likely that the injury will be

redressed by a favorable decision. See Bennett v. Spear, 117 S. Ct. 1154, 1161

(1997). 

An “injury in fact” must invade a legally protected interest. See Colorado

Supreme Court, 87 F.3d at 1164-65. Here, plaintiff’s complaint seeking

prosecution of others did not involve a legally protected interest because

“a private citizen lacks a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or

nonprosecution of another.” Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619 (1973);

see also Doyle v. Oklahoma Bar Ass’n, 998 F.2d 1559, 1566-67 (10th Cir. 1993)

(holding civil rights plaintiff lacked standing to require disciplinary proceedings
-3-

to be filed against another). Accordingly, we conclude that plaintiff lacks

standing to require defendants’ arrest on criminal charges.

The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New

Mexico is AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court

Stephen H. Anderson

Circuit Judge
§ 1306.6 Collection in installments. ( a ) Whenever feasible, and except as required otherwise by law, debts owed to the United States, together with interest, penalties, and administrative costs as required by this part, should be collected in one lump sum. This is true whether the debt is being collected under administrative offset, including salary offset, or by another method, including voluntary payment. However, if the debtor is financially unable to pay the indebtedness in one lump sum or the amount of debt exceeds 15 percent of disposable pay for an officially established pay interval collection must be made in regular installments. If possible, the installment payments should be sufficient in size and frequency to liquidate the Government's claim within three years, and in the case of a current MCC employee, installment repayment plans must be made over a period not greater than the anticipated period of employment, except as provided in paragraph (b) in this section. However, the amount deducted for any period under this section and § 1306.16 may not exceed 15 percent of the disposable pay from which the deduction is made, unless the employee has agreed in writing to the deduction of a greater amount or a higher deduction has been ordered by a court.
( b ) If the employee retires or resigns or if his or her employment ends before collection of the debt is completed, MCC may collect the debt from subsequent payments of any nature (e.g., final salary payment, lump-sum leave, etc.) due the employee from the paying agency as of the date of separation to the extent necessary to liquidate the debt. Following the employee's separation, MCC may collect any later payments of any kind that are due to the former employee from the United States to the extent necessary to liquidate the debt.
Exhibit 10.94



 Exhibit 10.94 
  
 Terms of Transition Services Arrangements with Michael J. Donahue 
  
 It may be beneficial for you to serve as a consultant to BearingPoint, Inc. for the thirty
(30) days immediately following the effective date of your employment termination, in order to assist management in the orderly transition of your duties, and the resolution of certain outstanding matters. In exchange for your reasonable
cooperation and assistance during this fixed thirty (30) day term, BearingPoint shall continue to make your email “Outlook” account available and active, and you may retain possession of your BearingPoint laptop computer and
accessories during this transition period. In exchange for your reasonable cooperation and assistance during this fixed thirty (30) day term, BearingPoint shall also pay you a fee, equivalent to one (1) month compensation at your current
monthly base salary. In the event that you choose not to do so, or you cease to provide reasonable assistance, in BearingPoint’s sole discretion, at any time during this thirty day term, BearingPoint shall be responsible to pay you only through
the date of your last contribution, if any on a pro-rated basis. At the conclusion of the transition period, you agree to immediately return the BearingPoint laptop computer and accessories. At such time your BearingPoint “Outlook” account
will also terminate.
================================================================================

[PORTIONS OF THIS EXHIBIT HAVE BEEN REDACTED PURSUANT TO A REQUEST FOR
CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION.]

                                  APPENDIX A-2

                                    PRODUCTS


Product Name:     AB ROLLER - AB-108

Product Description: Fitness Machine to exercise abdominal muscles

Projected Units Sold next 24 months: XXXXXX

Manufacturer:     CirTran-Asia

Sub-Manufacturer: Zhejiang Hengtai Machinary Manufacturing Co., Ltd

Marketing Partner Contact Info:     Tri-Star


Current Sale Price: $XXXXXX USD - CIRTRAN-ASIA

Current Cost to Manufacturer:       $XXXXXX

Total Tooling/Development Costs:    $ 10,000

Gross Profit Margin Per Unit - $XXXXXX

CirTran-Asia               $   .25 USD
Charles Ho                 $   .50 USD

INSTANT ABS Stock Option Schedule

Upon full execution of this Agreement, Cirtran's parent CirTran Corporation will
issue the following options to purchase restricted common stock:

                  Charles Ho                500,000 shares

These initial options will vest and be exercisable only after Cirtran has sold
500,000 AB ROLLER units. The options will be exercisable at $.06 per share after
vesting. The options will expire and will no longer be exercisable on the date
one year after the date hereof.

In addition, for each whole multiple of 200,000 AB ROLLER units sold by Cirtran
during the first 24 months of this Agreement in excess of the initial 200,000
units, CirTran Corporation will grant Charles Ho an option to purchase 100,000
shares. Each such additional option will be exercisable for a period of 12
months at an exercise price equal to the fair market value of CirTran
Corporation stock on the date of grant (i.e. the mean between the high bid and
low asked prices for the stock for the date of determination).



As a condition to grant of the options, each option holder will be required to
make standard investment representations to CirTran Corporation.

[XXXXX - REDACTED PURSUANT TO REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT AND FILED
SEPARATELY WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION.]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ 1425.1 Who may file an exception; time limits for filing; opposition; service. ( a ) Either party to an appeal to the Foreign Service Grievance Board under the provisions of 22 U.S.C. 4114 may file an exception to the action of the Foreign Service Grievance Board taken pursuant to the appeal.
( b ) The time limit for filing an exception to a Foreign Service Grievance Board action is thirty (30) days after such action is communicated to the parties.
( c ) An opposition to the exception may be filed by a party within thirty (30) days after the date of service of the exception.
( d ) A copy of the exception and any opposition shall be served on the other party.