alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**DEPA RTMENT OF THE A**  **I R FORCE**  HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE FLIGHT STA NDARDS AGENCY

1 6 Jul 1 5 MEMORANDUM FOR HQ FAA/A RM - 1 0 0 FROM: HQ AFFSA/X O F 6500 South MacArthur Blvd Bldg 4 Oklahoma City , OK 731 69 - 6918 SUBJECT: 14 CFR Exemption 7389 Addendum (Docket No. FAA - 200 0 - 8187 ) 14 CFR Exemption 7 3 8 9 was granted to the United States Air Force on 28 Nov 2000 and exempt s the USAF from the provisions of Section 91.169(b) . This exemption allows the Air Force to conduct local area and other flight training missions under instrument flight rules without designating an alternate airpor t, subject to certain conditions and limitations. The exemption wa s last renewed 22 J an 201 3 (7389G ) and expires 30 Nov 15. The conditions and limitations in the exemption includes a list of applicable airports . For this renewal, the Air Force reques ts the following change s to the airport list: 1. Remove Dobbins AFB, Georgia 2. Add Eglin AFB, Florida 3. Add Holloman AFB, New Mexico Since this is a long - standing exemption, the Air Force Respectfully requests a 3 - yr extension with no other changes to the curr ent policy . Please contact me with any questions at e - mail: hqaffsa.xof@us.af.mil or ( 405 ) 582 - 6087 . Thank y ou for yo ur assistance. 7/16/2015 

# X AN DR EW B . KREB S, Maj, U SA F Assistan t Chief, Flight D ir ect iv es Si gned by: KREB S. AN DR EW .B .1232714219
### §254c–18. Telemedicine; incentive grants regarding coordination among States

#### (a) In general

The Secretary may make grants to State professional licensing boards to carry out programs under which such licensing boards of various States cooperate to develop and implement State policies that will reduce statutory and regulatory barriers to telemedicine.

#### (b) Authorization of appropriations

For the purpose of carrying out subsection (a), there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2006.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title III, §330L, as added Pub. L. 108–163, §2(e)(1), Dec. 6, 2003, 117 Stat. 2021.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section deemed to have taken effect immediately after the enactment of Pub. L. 107–251, see section 3 of Pub. L. 108–163, set out as an Effective Date of 2003 Amendments note under section 233 of this title.
#### § 309.24 Bankruptcy.

Peace Corps generally terminates collection activity on debts that have been discharged in bankruptcy unless otherwise provided for by bankruptcy law. The CFO will seek legal advice by the General Counsel's office if there is the belief that any claims or offset may have survived the discharge of a debtor.
§ 1423.7 Investigation of charges. ( a ) The Regional Director, on behalf of the General Counsel, shall conduct such investigation of the charge as the Regional Director deems necessary.
( b ) During the course of the investigation all parties involved will have an opportunity to present their evidence and views to the Regional Director.
( c ) In connection with the investigation of charges, all persons are expected to cooperate fully with the Regional Director.
( d ) The purposes and policies of the Foreign Service Labor-Management Relations Statute can best be achieved by the full cooperation of all parties involved and the voluntary submission of all potentially relevant information from all potential sources during the course of the investigation. To this end, it shall be the policy of the Board and the General Counsel to protect the identity of individuals and the substance of the statements and information they submit or which is obtained during the investigation as a means of assuring the Board's and the General Counsel's continuing ability to obtain all relevant information.
#### In the Matter of the Arbitration between Bezozi, Inc., and Baby Bonnet Workers Union Local 110.

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied, with $10 costs. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
§ 123.3 Temporary import licenses. ( a ) A license (DSP-61) issued by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls is required for the temporary import and subsequent export of unclassified defense articles, unless exempted from this requirement pursuant to § 123.4. This requirement applies to: ( 1 ) Temporary imports of unclassified defense articles that are to be returned directly to the country from which they were shipped to the United States;
( 2 ) Temporary imports of unclassified defense articles in transit to a third country;
( b ) A bond may be required as appropriate (see part 125 of this subchapter for license requirements for technical data and classified defense articles.)
( c ) A DSP-61 license may be obtained by a U.S. importer in satisfaction of § 123.4(c)(4) of this subchapter. If a foreign exporter requires documentation for a permanent import, the U.S. importer must contact the Department of Justice's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for the appropriate documentation. A DSP-61 will not be approved to support permanent import requirements.
[58 FR 39299, July 22, 1993, as amended at 71 FR 20540, Apr. 21, 2006; 77 FR 22670, Apr. 17, 2012]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS STATEMENT CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
AS OF JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         197,350
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  290,640
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (13,329)
<INVENTORY>                                    120,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               796,867
<PP&E>                                         955,368
<DEPRECIATION>                                (140,615)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,740,192
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,936,604
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     23,991
<COMMON>                                       296,815
<OTHER-SE>                                  (4,875,606)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,740,192
<SALES>                                      1,152,185
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,152,185
<CGS>                                          990,203
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,733,940
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              41,108
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (5,484,490)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (5,484,490)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (5,484,490)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.42)


</TABLE>
§ 35.41 Stay pending appeal. ( a ) An initial decision is stayed automatically pending disposition of a motion for reconsideration or of an appeal to the authority head.
( b ) No administrative stay is available following a final decision of the authority head.
* 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. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________

No. 98-10092

Summary Calendar

_________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ANDREW LEE McCLINTON,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:97-CR-245-1-P)

October 20, 1998

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Andrew Lee McClinton appeals his conviction on three counts of

affecting interstate commerce by robbery and on three counts of

using a firearm in relation to those robberies, in violation of 18

U.S.C. §§ 924(c), 1951. He contends that the district court erred

when it refused to strike a juror for cause and ended the voir

dire. We find no abuse of discretion because the challenged juror

ultimately expressed that she could decide the case based on the-2-

law and on the evidence presented. S ee United States v. Munoz

, 15

F.3d 395, 397 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rodriguez

, 993 F.2d

1170, 1176 (5th Cir. 1993).

McClinton also argues that the t rial court abused its

discretion when it permitted the Government to prove that the

businesses McClinton robbed purchased products manufactured in

other states based on their employees' testimony that product

labels indicated the same. McClinton posits that the fact that a

business has corporate headquarters in another state does not prove

interstate commerce, and the Government relied primarily on product

labels and invoices to prove its case.

Each of the employees who testified had personal knowledge of

the interstate nature of the businesses gained by their daily work.

See Fed. R. Evid. 602; United States v. Davis

, 792 F.2d 1299, 1304-

05 (5th Cir. 1986). They did not rely solely on product labels or

invoices. Therefore, McClinton's argument that this testimony was

hearsay fails. Moreover, the employees’ testimony showed that the

robberies deple ted the businesses’ assets and that it was the

regular course of those businesses to buy products from out of

state. This was sufficient to sustain a Hobbs Act conviction.

United States v. Hebert

, 131 F.3d 514, 523-24 n.8 (5th Cir. 1997),

cert. denied

, 118 S. Ct. 1571 (1998). The district court’s

admission of testimony about product labels and purchase orders, if

error, was harmless. See Cupit v. Whitley , 28 F.3d 532, 539 (5th

Cir. 1994).

Last, McClinton contends that the trial court was required to-3-

instruct the jury that the Government had to prove a "substantial"

effect on interstate commerce. This argument is precluded by this

court's decision in Herbert , 131 F.3d at 520-21.

McClinton's conviction is AFFIRMED.
#### § 34.19 Compromise.

STATE may attempt to effect compromise in accordance with the standards set forth in the FCCS, 31 CFR part 902.
#### § 1006.965 Legal proceedings.

*Legal proceedings* means any criminal proceeding or any civil judicial proceeding, including a proceeding under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act (31 U.S.C. 3801-3812), to which the Federal Government or a State or local government or quasi-governmental authority is a party. The term also includes appeals from those proceedings.
Exhibit 32.2

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 Monster Worldwide, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Timothy T. Yates, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  | By: |  | /s/ TIMOTHY T. YATESTimothy T. Yates
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Date: May 8, 2008
| |  | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Monster Worldwide, Inc. and will be retained by Monster
Worldwide, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---



QuickLinks
### MEMORANDUM

DATE: September 11, 2014 TO: Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR

–2013 -0602 FROM: Anita Lee, EPA Region 9 SUBJECT: August 22, 2014 Meeting and Tribal Consultation with Fort Mojave Tribe Regarding

Proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants **SUMMARY** A meeting was held between EPA and the attendees listed below on August 22, 2014 to discuss the proposed Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants and the forthcoming Supplemental Proposal for Tribes and Territories . The Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants was proposed on June 2, 2014 and published in the Federal Register on June 18, 2014 . **ATTENDEES** Fort Mojave Indian Tribe  Luke Johnson, Environmental Director  Christine Med ley, GAP Coordinator  Walter Roderick, Emergency Programs and Environmental Response EPA  Tom Powers, Senior Policy Advisor, Office of Air and Radiation  Melanie King, Office of Air Quality Planning and  Standards (OAQPS)  Matt Clouse, EPA Office of Atmospheric Programs  Nate Topham, OAQPS  Mary Johnson, OAQPS  Rick Vetter, Office of General Counsel  Amy Zimpfer, Associate Director, Region 9 Air Division  Anita Lee, Region 9 Air Division  Destinee Cooper, Region 9 Land Division Calpine  Kurt Fetters, Genera l Manager of South Point Energy Center  Barbara McBride, Director of Environmental Services 

###  Bruce Carlson, Director of Environmental Health and Safety **ATTACHMENTS**  Powerpoint presentation titled “Clean Power Plan_Consultation with Fort Mojave Tribe_082214.pptx”
### §290dd–2a. Promoting access to information on evidence-based programs and practices

#### (a) In general

The Assistant Secretary shall, as appropriate, improve access to reliable and valid information on evidence-based programs and practices, including information on the strength of evidence associated with such programs and practices, related to mental and substance use disorders for States, local communities, nonprofit entities, and other stakeholders, by posting on the Internet website of the Administration information on evidence-based programs and practices that have been reviewed by the Assistant Secretary in accordance with the requirements of this section.

#### (b) Applications

#### (1) Application period

In carrying out subsection (a), the Assistant Secretary may establish a period for the submission of applications for evidence-based programs and practices to be posted publicly in accordance with subsection (a).

#### (2) Notice

In establishing the application period under paragraph (1), the Assistant Secretary shall provide for the public notice of such application period in the Federal Register. Such notice may solicit applications for evidence-based programs and practices to address gaps in information identified by the Assistant Secretary, the National Mental Health and Substance Use Policy Laboratory established under section 290aa–0 of this title, or the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, including pursuant to the evaluation and recommendations under section 6021 of the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Reform Act of 2016 or priorities identified in the strategic plan under section 290aa(l) of this title.

#### (c) Requirements

The Assistant Secretary may establish minimum requirements for the applications submitted under subsection (b), including applications related to the submission of research and evaluation.

#### (d) Review and rating

#### (1) In general

The Assistant Secretary shall review applications prior to public posting in accordance with subsection (a), and may prioritize the review of applications for evidence-based programs and practices that are related to topics included in the notice provided under subsection (b)(2).

#### (2) System

In carrying out paragraph (1), the Assistant Secretary may utilize a rating and review system, which may include information on the strength of evidence associated with the evidence-based programs and practices and a rating of the methodological rigor of the research supporting the applications.

#### (3) Public access to metrics and rating

The Assistant Secretary shall make the metrics used to evaluate applications under this section, and any resulting ratings of such applications, publicly available.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title V, §543A, as added Pub. L. 114–255, div. B, title VII, §7002, Dec. 13, 2016, 130 Stat. 1222.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 6021 of the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Reform Act of 2016, referred to in subsec. (b)(2), is section 6021 of Pub. L. 114–255, which is set out as a note under section 290aa of this title.
### §288a. Visiting Scientist Awards

(a) The Secretary may make awards (hereafter in this section referred to as "Visiting Scientist Awards") to outstanding scientists who agree to serve as visiting scientists at institutions of postsecondary education which have significant enrollments of disadvantaged students. Visiting Scientist Awards shall be made by the Secretary to enable the faculty and students of such institutions to draw upon the special talents of scientists from other institutions for the purpose of receiving guidance, advice, and instruction with regard to research, teaching, and curriculum development in the biomedical and behavioral sciences and such other aspects of these sciences as the Secretary shall deem appropriate.

(b) The amount of each Visiting Scientist Award shall include such sum as shall be commensurate with the salary or remuneration which the individual receiving the award would have been entitled to receive from the institution with which the individual has, or had, a permanent or immediately prior affiliation. Eligibility for and terms of Visiting Scientist Awards shall be determined in accordance with regulations the Secretary shall prescribe.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IV, §488, as added Pub. L. 99–158, §2, Nov. 20, 1985, 99 Stat. 872.)
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

Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RYAN CARTER,

Petitioner,

v.

D. K. SISTO, warden,

Respondent.                                                           /

No. C 08-3593 MHP (pr)

JUDGMENT

The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed because it was not filed within the

time permitted by the habeas statute of limitations.

IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED.

DATED: January 26, 2010                                             Marilyn Hall PatelUnited States District Judge

Case 3:08-cv-03593-MHP   Document 17   Filed 01/27/10   Page 1 of 1

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2018-03-12T03:28:12-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
### §300j–16. Assistance to colonias

#### (a) Definitions

As used in this section:

#### (1) Border State

The term "border State" means Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas.

#### (2) Eligible community

The term "eligible community" means a low-income community with economic hardship that—

(A) is commonly referred to as a colonia;

(B) is located along the United States-Mexico border (generally in an unincorporated area); and

(C) lacks a safe drinking water supply or adequate facilities for the provision of safe drinking water for human consumption.

#### (b) Grants to alleviate health risks

The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and the heads of other appropriate Federal agencies are authorized to award grants to a border State to provide assistance to eligible communities to facilitate compliance with national primary drinking water regulations or otherwise significantly further the health protection objectives of this subchapter.

#### (c) Use of funds

Each grant awarded pursuant to subsection (b) shall be used to provide assistance to one or more eligible communities with respect to which the residents are subject to a significant health risk (as determined by the Administrator or the head of the Federal agency making the grant) attributable to the lack of access to an adequate and affordable drinking water supply system.

#### (d) Cost sharing

The amount of a grant awarded pursuant to this section shall not exceed 50 percent of the costs of carrying out the project that is the subject of the grant.

#### (e) Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section $25,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1997 through 1999.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XIV, §1456, as added Pub. L. 104–182, title I, §135, Aug. 6, 1996, 110 Stat. 1679.)
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 05-420.1 

________________________________________________________________________ 

DEFENSE 

Assistance 

 Agreement between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and GUATEMALA 

Amending the Agreement of 

September 20 and 27, 1974 

 

Effected by Exchange of Notes at 

Guatemala January 20 and April 20, 2005 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 GUATEMALA 

 Defense: Assistance 

 Agreement amending the agreement of 

 September 20 and 27, 1974. 

 Effected by exchange of notes at Guatemala 

 January 20 and April 20, 2005; 

 Entered into force April 20, 2005.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Theophilus Ward, Appellant.

Motion for leave to appeal as a poor person and for assignment of counsel denied, without prejudice to renewal on proper papers showing the indigence of the appellant and the merits of his appeal.
### §3615. Effect on State laws

Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to invalidate or limit any law of a State or political subdivision of a State, or of any other jurisdiction in which this subchapter shall be effective, that grants, guarantees, or protects the same rights as are granted by this subchapter; but any law of a State, a political subdivision, or other such jurisdiction that purports to require or permit any action that would be a discriminatory housing practice under this subchapter shall to that extent be invalid.

(Pub. L. 90–284, title VIII, §816, formerly §815, Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 89; renumbered §816, Pub. L. 100–430, §8(1), Sept. 13, 1988, 102 Stat. 1625.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 816 of Pub. L. 90–284 was renumbered section 817 and is classified to section 3616 of this title.