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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6696

WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON, a/k/a Allah-God Kundalini Isa Allah, and others similarly situated,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

HARRELL WATTS, Administrator, National Inmate Appeals, Federal BOP; HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director, Federal BOP; KIMBERLEY WHITE, Regional Administrator, Inmate Appeals, Federal BOP, Mid-Atlantic Region; VANESSA P. ADAMS, Warden, Petersburg FCC, Federal BOP; JESUS M. HUERTAS, Supervisory Chaplain, Petersburg FCC, Federal BOP; MRS. BROWDER, Accoc. Chaplain, FCC Petersburg [medium] Federal BOP,

Defendants – Appellees.

No. 09-7180

WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON, a/k/a Allah-God Kundalini Isa Allah, and others similarly situated,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

HARRELL WATTS, Administrator, National Inmate Appeals, Federal BOP; HARLEY G. LAPPIN, Director, Federal BOP; KIMBERLEY WHITE, Regional Administrator, Inmate Appeals, Federal BOP, Mid-Atlantic Region; VANESSA P. ADAMS, Warden, Petersburg FCC, Federal BOP; JESUS M. HUERTAS, Supervisory Chaplain, Petersburg FCC, Federal BOP; MRS. BROWDER, Accoc. Chaplain, FCC Petersburg [medium] Federal BOP,

Defendants – Appellees.Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:06-cv-01061-TSE-TCB)

Submitted: September 24, 2009 Decided: November 4, 2009

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Henry Harrison, Appellant Pro Se. Monika L. Moore, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

23 PER CURIAM:

William Harrison appeals the district court’s order

granting the Defendants’ motion to dismiss Harrison’s complaint

pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of

Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and denying reconsideration of

that order. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm the court’s order granting the

Defendants’ motion to dismiss for the reasons stated by the

district court. With respect to the district court’s order

denying reconsideration of that order, Harrison has forfeited

appellate review of that order pursuant to 4th Cir. R. 34(b) and

we therefore affirm that order. Harrison v. Watts , No.

1:06-cv-01061-TSE-TCB (E.D. Va. Mar. 26 & June 9, 2009). We

also deny Harrison’s motion to schedule oral argument as we

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Part 5339 - Acquisition of Information Technology       DAFFARS PART 5339 Knowledge Center          *Revised: June 2023*                                       5339.101 Policy                                          5339.7201-90 Data Servers/Centers Approval Process    5339.101 Policy       (1) See MP5301.601(a)(i).5339.7201-90  Data Servers/Centers Approval Process       Purchase Request packages for data servers/centers must include SAF/CIO A6 approval to be accepted as valid for procurement action by a contracting officer.          See DAFM 17-1301, *Computer Security, COMPUSEC, paragraph 2.9.1.3 & 3.6.1*
524.203 Policy.

(a) See 41 CFR 105-60 and GSA FOIA procedures available on Insite, for requirements on making

records available under FOIA.

(b) The contracting officer shall notify the appropriate FOIA officer of the request.

Parent topic: Subpart 524.2 - Freedom of Information Act
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. John Lees, Appellant, against Kenneth Keill, as Director of Willard State Hospital, Respondent.

— Order unanimously affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. (Appeal from order of Seneca Special Term dismissing the writ of habeas corpus and remanding relator to the custody of the Director of Willard State Hospital.) Present — ■ Williams, P. J., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
§ 1103.110 Self-evaluation. ( a ) The agency shall, by April 9, 1987, evaluate its current policies and practices, and the effects thereof, that do not or may not meet the requirements of this part, and, to the extent modification of any such policies and practices is required, the agency shall proceed to make the necessary modifications.
( b ) The agency shall provide an opportunity to interested persons, including handicapped persons or organizations representing handicapped persons, to participate in the self-evaluation process by submitting comments (both oral and written).
( c ) The agency shall, until three years following the completion of the self-evaluation, maintain on file and make available for public inspections: ( 1 ) A description of areas examined and any problems identified, and
( 2 ) A description of any modifications made.
Comments to "Oil and Natural Gas Sector Hydraulically Fractured 

Oil Well Completions and Associated Gas during Ongoing 

Production"

Dear U.A. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards:

The attached information is submitted by me on behalf of my company, Primus Green Energy, Inc., with respect 

to the subject white paper and specifically to point 14, page 47, as our company’s response to the question, “Did 

the EPA correctly identify all the available technologies for reducing associated gas emissions from hydraulically 

fractured oil wells or are there others?”

Please contact me with any questions regarding this submission including requests for clarification or for any 

additional information.

Thank you for the opportunity you have afforded to provide this information.

Respectfully,

Robert J. Johnsen Robert J. Johnsen

Chief Executive Officer 

Primus Green Energy, Inc. 

219 Homestead Rd | Hillsborough, NJ 08844 

o: 908-281-6000 x 111 | m: 908-938-9875

rjohnsen@primusge.com| www.primusge.com

Robert Johnsen <RJohnsen@primusge.com>

Fri 6/13/2014 9:57 AM

To:OilandGas.Whitepapers <OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov>; 

 6 attachments

PrimusGreenEnergy - Comments on EPA Completion White Paper 06-04-2014 (3).pdf; PrimusGreenEnergy - ATT#2 White 

paper - Flared Gas Solution.pdf; PrimusGreenEnergy - ATT#3 White-paper - STG+.pdf; PrimusGreenEnergy - ATT#4 Whitepaper - GTL Comparison.pdf; PrimusGreenEnergy - ATT#5 Facility and Capabilities 06-04-2014 (2).pdf; PrimusGreenEnergy -

ATT#6 Executive Biographies 06-04-2014 (2).pdf; 

Comments to "Oil and Natural Gas Sector Hydraulical... - OilandGas.Whitepapers Page 1 of 2

https://pod51045.outlook.com/owa/OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov/ 8/27/2014
“The information in this email and any attachments may be confidential and privileged. Access to this email by anyone other than the intended addressee 

is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient (or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this information to the intended recipient) 

please notify the sender by reply email and immediately delete this email and any copies from your computer and/or storage system. The sender does not 

authorize the use, distribution, disclosure or reproduction of this email (or any part of its contents) by anyone other than the intended recipient(s).

No representation is made that this email and any attachments are free of viruses. Virus scanning is recommended and is the responsibility of the 

recipient.”

Comments to "Oil and Natural Gas Sector Hydraulical... - OilandGas.Whitepapers Page 2 of 2

https://pod51045.outlook.com/owa/OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov/ 8/27/2014
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 81 (Friday, April 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 24744]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-09868]

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

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK

Postponement Notice of Open Special Meeting of the Sub-Saharan 
Africa Advisory Committee of the Export-Import Bank of the United 
States (Ex-Im Bank)

SUMMARY: The Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory Committee was established by 
Public Law 105-121, November 26, 1997, to advise the Board of Directors 
on the development and implementation of policies and programs designed 
to support the expansion of the Bank's financial commitments in Sub-
Saharan Africa under the loan, guarantee, and insurance programs of the 
Bank. Further, the Committee shall make recommendations on how the Bank 
can facilitate greater support by U.S. commercial banks for trade with 
Sub-Saharan Africa.
    Postponement: The Sub-Saharan Africa Advisory Committee of the 
Export-Import Bank of the United States must postpone its Tuesday, 
April 30, 2013, Open Special Meeting until further notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, contact Exa 
Richards, 811 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20571, (202) 565-3455.

Sharon Whitt,
Director, Information Quality and Records Management.
[FR Doc. 2013-09868 Filed 4-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
```
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.

§ 240.3a67-8 Timing requirements, reevaluation period, and termination of status. ( a ) *Timing requirements.* A person that is not registered as a major security-based swap participant, but that meets the criteria in § 240.3a67-1 to be a major security-based swap participant as a result of its security-based swap activities in a fiscal quarter, will not be deemed to be a major security-based swap participant until the earlier of the date on which it submits a complete application for registration pursuant to section 15F of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78o-10) or two months after the end of that quarter.
( b ) *Reevaluation period.* Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this section, if a person that is not registered as a major security-based swap participant meets the criteria in § 240.3a67-1 to be a major security-based swap participant in a fiscal quarter, but does not exceed any applicable threshold by more than twenty percent in that quarter: ( 1 ) That person will not immediately be deemed a major security-based swap participant pursuant to the timing requirements specified in paragraph (a) of this section; but
( 2 ) That person will be deemed a major security-based swap participant pursuant to the timing requirements specified in paragraph (a) of this section at the end of the next fiscal quarter if the person exceeds any of the applicable daily average thresholds in that next fiscal quarter.
( c ) *Termination of status.* A person that is deemed to be a major security-based swap participant shall continue to be deemed a major security-based swap participant until such time that its security-based swap activities do not exceed any of the daily average thresholds set forth within § 240.3a67-1 for four consecutive fiscal quarters after the date on which the person becomes registered as a major security-based swap participant.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-30389 Summary Calendar

ANTHONY A. EDWARDS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus R.L. PROSPER, Corrections Officer (FDC Oakdale); SENEGAL, Unit Disciplinary Team (FDC Oakdale); KOSCO, Member Unit Disciplinary Team (FDC Oakdale); HAM, District Hearing Officer (FDC Oakdale); R.D. MILES, Warden FDC Oakdale; JANET RENO, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 98-CV-928

-------------------- January 17, 2000 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Anthony A. Edwards (#26325) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents , 403 U.S. 388, 389 (1971). Edwards’ motion for leave to file a supplemental brief is GRANTED. Edwards has not shown that the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion for recusal. See Liteky v.No. 99-30389 -2- United States , 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994)(judicial rulings alone do not constitute a valid basis for a bias or partiality motion). Edwards has not challenged sufficiently the district court’s reasons for dismissing his due process claims. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987)(when appellant fails to identify error in district court's analysis, it is the same as if appellant had not appealed judgment). Edwards also has abandoned his conspiracy, alienage discrimination, involuntary servitude, and supervisory liability claims by failing to assert them properly and by failing to challenge the district court’s reasons for dismissing them. Edwards has not shown the type of injury required to allege a denial of access claim. See Lewis v. Casey , 116 S. Ct. 2174, 2179-80 (1996). Edwards has not made the required showing to sustain a retaliation claim that “but for the retaliatory motive the complained of incident . . . would not have occurred.” Woods v. Smith , 60 F.3d 1161, 1166 (5th Cir. 1995). Edwards has not shown that the district court erred in dismissing his complaint. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment on alternate grounds.
MOTION TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF GRANTED; DISMISSAL
AFFIRMED.
§ 101.1 Protection of American interests. Officers of the Foreign Service shall protect the rights and interests of the United States in its international agricultural, commercial, and financial relations. In pursuance of this duty, they shall: ( a ) Guard against the infringement of rights of American citizens in matters relating to commerce and navigation which are based on custom, international law, or treaty.
( b ) Observe, report on, and, whenever possible, endeavor to remove discriminations against American agricultural, commercial, and industrial interests in other countries.
( c ) Protect the national commercial reputation of the United States.
#### § 269.9 Form T-6 for application under section 310(a)(1) of the Trust Indenture Act for determination of the eligibility of a foreign person to act as institutional trustee.

This form shall be used for the filing of an application pursuant to rule 10a-1 [§ 260.10a-1 of this chapter] to obtain authorization for a corporation or other person organized and doing business under the laws of a foreign government to act as sole trustee under an indenture qualified or to be qualified under the Act.

[56 FR 22321, May 15, 1991]

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations affecting Form T-6, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the quarterly report of PetCARE Television Network,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending June 30, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 14, 2004 (the
"Report"), I, Philip M. Cohen, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.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
            material respects, the financial condition and result of operations
            of the Company.



/s/ Philip M. Cohen
-----------------------
Philip M. Cohen
Chief Executive Officer
August 14, 2004


A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY, et al.

Plaintiffs,

    v.

CHARLES CONNOR, et al.

Defendants.                                                                           /

No. C 08-00484 JSW

ORDER (1) REQUIRINGSUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFINGAND (2) CONTINUING HEARING

On June 21, 2010, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Monsanto Co. v. Geertson

Seed Farms, __ S.Ct. __, 2010 WL 2471057 (U.S. June 21, 2010).  The Court HEREBY

ORDERS Plaintiffs to file a supplemental brief to address the impact, if any, of the Supreme

Court’s opinion on their request for a permanent injunction in the above-captioned matter by no

later than July 6, 2010.  Defendants and Intervener-Defendants may file a response to Plaintiffs’

supplemental brief by no later than July 15, 2010.  The Court CONTINUES the hearing on

Plaintiffs’ motion for a permanent injunction to August 13, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 22, 2010                                                                JEFFREY S. WHITEUNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-00484-JSW   Document 523   Filed 06/22/10   Page 1 of 1
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Multilingual Initiative (MLI) Issue Committee will be conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. 

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, January 11, 2005 from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. e.t. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Inez E. De Jesus at 1-888-912-1227, or 954-423-7977. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Multilingual Initiative Issue Committee will be held Tuesday, January 11, 2005 from 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. e.t. via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7977, or write Inez E. De Jesus, TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Rd., Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Inez E. De Jesus. Ms. De Jesus can                           ( print page 74569)                        be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7977, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org*.                 

The agenda will include the following: Various IRS issues. 

Dated: December 9, 2004. 

Bernard Coston, 

Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. 

[FR Doc. 04-27370 Filed 12-13-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P