alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Exploring Careers

              																								United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics.						"Exploring Careers: Industrial Production Occupations : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 2001-2" in *Exploring Careers*			(1979).						https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4731/item/523564, accessed on September 26, 2024.	    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
### §300aa–6. Authorization of appropriations

(a) To carry out this part other than section 300aa–2(9) of this title there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

(b) To carry out section 300aa–2(9) of this title there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XXI, §2106, as added Pub. L. 99–660, title III, §311(a), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3758; amended Pub. L. 101–502, §4, Nov. 3, 1990, 104 Stat. 1286; Pub. L. 108–276, §2(c), July 21, 2004, 118 Stat. 842.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 300aa–6, act July 1, 1944, §2107, was successively renumbered by subsequent acts and transferred, see section 238d of this title.

A prior section 2106 of act July 1, 1944, was successively renumbered by subsequent acts and transferred, see section 238c of this title.

Prior sections 300aa–7 to 300aa–9, act July 1, 1944, §§2108–2110, respectively, were successively renumbered by subsequent acts and transferred, see sections 238e to 238g, respectively, of this title.

#### Amendments

2004—Pub. L. 108–276 substituted provisions authorizing appropriations for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 for provisions authorizing appropriations for fiscal years 1991 through 1995 in subsecs. (a) and (b).

1990—Pub. L. 101–502 substituted provisions authorizing appropriations for fiscal years 1991 through 1995 for provisions authorizing appropriations for fiscal years 1987 through 1991 in subsecs. (a) and (b).
### §290ee–6. Regional Centers of Excellence in Substance Use Disorder Education

#### (a) In general

The Secretary, in consultation with appropriate agencies, shall award cooperative agreements to eligible entities for the designation of such entities as Regional Centers of Excellence in Substance Use Disorder Education for purposes of improving health professional training resources with respect to substance use disorder prevention, treatment, and recovery.

#### (b) Eligibility

To be eligible to receive a cooperative agreement under subsection (a), an entity shall—

(1) be an accredited entity that offers education to students in various health professions, which may include—

(A) a teaching hospital;

(B) a medical school;

(C) a certified behavioral health clinic; or

(D) any other health professions school, school of public health, or Cooperative Extension Program at institutions of higher education, as defined in section 1001 of title 20, engaged in the prevention, treatment, or recovery of substance use disorders;

(2) demonstrate community engagement and partnerships with community stakeholders, including entities that train health professionals, mental health counselors, social workers, peer recovery specialists, substance use treatment programs, community health centers, physician offices, certified behavioral health clinics, research institutions, and law enforcement; and

(3) submit to the Secretary an application containing such information, at such time, and in such manner, as the Secretary may require.

#### (c) Activities

An entity receiving an award under this section shall develop, evaluate, and distribute evidence-based resources regarding the prevention and treatment of, and recovery from, substance use disorders. Such resources may include information on—

(1) the neurology and pathology of substance use disorders;

(2) advancements in the treatment of substance use disorders;

(3) techniques and best practices to support recovery from substance use disorders;

(4) strategies for the prevention and treatment of, and recovery from substance use disorders across patient populations; and

(5) other topic areas that are relevant to the objectives described in subsection (a).

#### (d) Geographic distribution

In awarding cooperative agreements under subsection (a), the Secretary shall take into account regional differences among eligible entities and shall make an effort to ensure geographic distribution.

#### (e) Evaluation

The Secretary shall evaluate each project carried out by an entity receiving an award under this section and shall disseminate the findings with respect to each such evaluation to appropriate public and private entities.

#### (f) Funding

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, $4,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 2023.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title V, §551, as added Pub. L. 115–271, title VII, §7101, Oct. 24, 2018, 132 Stat. 4037.)
§ 146.300 Admission. ( a ) *General.* No person shall, on the basis of sex, be denied admission, or be subjected to discrimination in admission, by any recipient to which §§ 146.300 through §§ 146.310 apply, except as provided in §§ 146.225 and §§ 146.230.
( b ) *Specific prohibitions.* ( 1 ) In determining whether a person satisfies any policy or criterion for admission, or in making any offer of admission, a recipient to which §§ 146.300 through 146.310 apply shall not: ( i ) Give preference to one person over another on the basis of sex, by ranking applicants separately on such basis, or otherwise;
( ii ) Apply numerical limitations upon the number or proportion of persons of either sex who may be admitted; or
( iii ) Otherwise treat one individual differently from another on the basis of sex.
( 2 ) A recipient shall not administer or operate any test or other criterion for admission that has a disproportionately adverse effect on persons on the basis of sex unless the use of such test or criterion is shown to predict validly success in the education program or activity in question and alternative tests or criteria that do not have such a disproportionately adverse effect are shown to be unavailable.
( c ) *Prohibitions relating to marital or parental status.* In determining whether a person satisfies any policy or criterion for admission, or in making any offer of admission, a recipient to which §§ 146.300 through 146.310 apply: ( 1 ) Shall not apply any rule concerning the actual or potential parental, family, or marital status of a student or applicant that treats persons differently on the basis of sex;
( 2 ) Shall not discriminate against or exclude any person on the basis of pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or recovery therefrom, or establish or follow any rule or practice that so discriminates or excludes;
( 3 ) Subject to § 146.235(d), shall treat disabilities related to pregnancy, childbirth, termination of pregnancy, or recovery therefrom in the same manner and under the same policies as any other temporary disability or physical condition; and
( 4 ) Shall not make pre-admission inquiry as to the marital status of an applicant for admission, including whether such applicant is “Miss” or “Mrs.” A recipient may make pre-admission inquiry as to the sex of an applicant for admission, but only if such inquiry is made equally of such applicants of both sexes and if the results of such inquiry are not used in connection with discrimination prohibited by these Title IX regulations.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GERRY WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

v.

Sergeant METCALFE; et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 08-3907 SI (pr)

ORDER REFERRING ACTION TO

PRISONER MEDIATION PROGRAM 

Gerry Williams, a California prisoner, filed this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C.

§ 1983 asserting that defendants were deliberately indifferent to his safety. Defendants have

requested that this case be referred to the court's Pro Se Prisoner Mediation Program, in which

selected prisoner cases with unrepresented plaintiffs are referred to a neutral magistrate judge

for mediation proceedings consisting of one or more conferences as determined by the mediator.

In light of the expressed interest by at least the defendants, it would be helpful for the parties to

engage in mediation. Defendants' motion for referral to the mediation program is GRANTED.

(Docket # 50.)

Good cause appearing therefor, this case is now referred to Magistrate Judge Vadas for

mediation proceedings pursuant to the Pro Se Prisoner Mediation Program. The proceedings

will take place within 90 days of the date this order is filed. Magistrate Judge Vadas will

coordinate a time and date for a mediation proceeding with all interested parties and/or their

representatives and, within five days after the conclusion of the mediation proceedings, file with

the court a report for the prisoner mediation proceedings. 

Case 3:08-cv-03907-SI Document 51 Filed 07/09/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

The clerk will send to Magistrate Judge Vadas a copy of the complaint (docket # 1), the

order of service (docket # 7), the order denying motion to dismiss in part and denying motion

to stay (docket #32), and this order.

In light of the referral of this action for mediation, the briefing schedule for dispositive

motions is now vacated. The stay of discovery remains in place. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 9, 2010 _______________________

 SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-03907-SI Document 51 Filed 07/09/10 Page 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ronald C., Appellant.

Judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered January 26, 1977, affirmed. No opinion. This case is remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (subd 5). Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Latham and Gulotta, JJ., concur.
### §3797u–3. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3797u–3 was editorially reclassified as section 10614 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2465 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2465

To suspend temporarily the duty on woven fabric containing vicuna hair.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 18, 2005

 Mr. Simmons introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To suspend temporarily the duty on woven fabric containing vicuna hair.

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

SECTION 1. WOVEN FABRIC OF VICUNA HAIR.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.42.02       Woven fabric       Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         containing 85                                                      31/2008
                         percent or more
                         by weight of
                         vicuna hair
                         (provided for in
                         subheadings
                         5111.11.70,
                         5111.19.60,
                         5112.11.60, or
                         5112.19.95)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Donald G. Lessard, Appellant, v Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Respondent, et al., Defendant. Caterpillar, Inc., Third-Party Plaintiff, v Tuscarora Construction Co., Inc., et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents.

[715 NYS2d 816]

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff, a track loader operator employed by third-party defendant, Tuscarora Construction Co., Inc. (Tuscarora), the general contractor on a construction project at a site owned by defendant-third-party defendant, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (Niagara Mohawk), was injured when he stepped from the cab of the front end loader that he was operating onto the tracks of the loader, in order to latch the door. Plaintiff slipped on the tracks of the loader and fell approximately 4V2 feet to the ground below, sustaining back and leg injuries. Plaintiff commenced this action against Niagara Mohawk, alleging a cause of action for negligence as well as a cause of action under Labor Law §§ 200, 240 (1), and § 241 (6). Plaintiff also commenced a separate products liability action against defendant Caterpillar, Inc. (Caterpillar). The two actions were consolidated, and Caterpillar commenced a third-party action against Niagara Mohawk and Tuscarora seeking common-law indemnification. Thereafter, Niagara Mohawk moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and plaintiff cross-moved for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability under Labor Law § 240 (1). Plaintiff withdrew his Labor Law § 200 claim.

Supreme Court properly granted that part of Niagara Mohawk’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 240 (1) claim and properly denied plaintiff’s cross motion. Plaintiff’s fall from the tracks of the construction vehicle was not an elevation-related risk that calls for any of the protective devices of the types listed in Labor Law § 240 (1) *(see, Bond v York Hunter Constr.,*95 NY2d 883; *see also, Tillman v Triou’s Custom Homes,*253 AD2d 254, 256-257).

*942The court also properly granted that part of Niagara Mohawk’s motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the Labor Law § 241 (6) claim. That claim was premised on an alleged violation of 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (d), which provides for protection from slipping hazards. Although 12 NYCRR 23-1.7 (d) is specific enough to support a Labor Law § 241 (6) claim *(see, Francis v Aluminum Co.,*240 AD2d 985, 987-988; *Cafarella v Harrison Radiator Div. of Gen. Motors,*237 AD2d 936, 937), that regulation is inapplicable to this case because the tracks of the construction vehicle from which plaintiff fell do not constitute an elevated working surface within the meaning of that regulation *(see,*12 NYCRR 23-1.7 [d]; *Francis v Aluminum Co., supra,*at 987-988). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Major, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Wisner, Kehoe and Balio, JJ.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4416 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain acrylic filament tow. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 19, 2012 

Mr. BISHOP of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain acrylic filament 

tow. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN ACRYLIC FILAMENT TOW. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4416 IH

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Acrylic filament tow 

(polyacrylonitrile tow) containing by weight 92 percent or more of 

polyacrylonitrile, not more 

than 0.01 percent of zinc, 

and 2 percent or more but 

not over 8 percent of 

water, importing in the 

form of bundles of crimped 

product 250,000 filaments 

(plus or minus 10 percent) 

with an average decitex of 

3.3 to 5.6 decitex (plus or 

minus 10 percent) and 

length greater than 2 meters (provided for in subheading 5501.30.00) ......... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### § 279.2 Form ADV-W, notice of withdrawal from registration as investment adviser.

This form shall be filed pursuant to Rule 203-2 (§ 275.203-2 of this chapter) by a registered investment adviser as a notice of withdrawal from registration as such under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

###### Editorial Note

#### Editorial Note:

For Federal Register citations affecting Form ADV-W, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov.*
#### Mary MULLINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 81-3238.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Submitted on Briefs May 20, 1982.

Decided June 22, 1982.

Daniel Manring, Barkan & Neff, Columbus, Ohio, for plaintiff-appellant.

Joseph Kane, Asst. U. S. Atty., Columbus, Ohio, for defendant-appellee.

Before KENNEDY and MARTIN, Circuit Judges, and GUY,* District Judge.

*

 Honorable Ralph B. Guy, Jr., District Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.

PER CURIAM.

Mary Mullins appeals the District Court’s order affirming the Secretary’s decision terminating her social security disability benefits. Mrs. Mullins had received benefits from September 1974 to June 1978. The evidence supporting her claim revealed lower back pain and some mental impairment. Her benefits ceased after Dr. Korb examined her and found her to be in relatively good physical and mental condition. On appeal, Mrs. Mullins argues that Dr. Korb’s report is inadequate evidence upon which to base the termination decision.

The standard in a termination ease is, as in all other social security cases, whether the Secretary’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. *Myers v. Richardson,*471 F.2d 1265, 1267, 1268 (6th Cir. 1972). Our task is not to reweigh the evidence. That is solely the province of the Secretary. *Wokojance v. Weinberger,*513 F.2d 210 (6th Cir. 1975). Instead we must determine if there is present here “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a con*473elusion.” *Richardson v. Perales,*402 U.S. 389, 401, 91 S.Ct. 1420, 1427, 28 L.Ed.2d 842. (1971).

Dr. Korb’s report easily satisfies that standard because his medical conclusions lead directly to the inference that Mrs. Mullins is capable of performing substantial gainful activity. The focus on her appeal is not so much on the insufficiency of his report *per se,*but on the failure of the Secretary to obtain updated reports from the physicians who originally, supported Mrs. Mullins’ disability claim. She cites *Marker v. Finch,*322 F.Supp. 905 (D.Del. 1971) for the proposition that a termination decision must be based upon updated reports by the physicians whose findings resulted in the initial disability determination. We are not bound by that lower court decision nor do we find support for such a rule in the relevant authorities. Neither Congress nor the Supreme Court has ever specified any source from which evidence of employment ability or disability must emanate. Instead only substantial evidence has been required in order to give proper deference to those charged with administering the social security programs. To order the Secretary to obtain reports from certain physicians would interfere with that program on a level not contemplated by that legal standard. Mrs. Mullins has offered no evidence questioning the competence or relevance of Dr. Korb’s report. Therefore, it stands as substantial evidence upon which the Secretary’s decision may be founded.

Judgment affirmed.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2447 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on P-Phenylphenol. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 18, 2005 

Mr. MURPHY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on PPhenylphenol. 

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

3 SECTION 1. P-PHENYLPHENOL. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.02.16 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 P-Phenylphenol) is amended by striking ‘‘12/31/2006’’ 

7 and inserting ‘‘12/31/2009’’. 

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

9 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 
2 

•HR 2447 IH 

1 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

2 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ