alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 49
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 49 appear at 85 FR 75672, Nov. 25, 2020.

§ 49.27 Access and fees. ( a ) *Fair, open and equal access.* ( 1 ) A swap data repository, consistent with Section 21 of the Act, shall provide its services to market participants, including but not limited to designated contract markets, swap execution facilities, derivatives clearing organizations, swap dealers, major swap participants and any other counterparties, on a fair, open and equal basis. For this purpose, a swap data repository shall not provide access to its services on a discriminatory basis but is required to provide its services to all market participants for swaps it accepts in an asset class.
( 2 ) Consistent with the principles of open access set forth in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, a swap data repository shall not tie or bundle the offering of mandated regulatory services with other ancillary services that a swap data repository may provide to market participants.
( b ) *Fees.* ( 1 ) Any fees or charges imposed by a swap data repository in connection with the reporting of SDR data and any other supplemental or ancillary services provided by such swap data repository shall be equitable and established in a uniform and non-discriminatory manner. Fees or charges shall not be used as an artificial barrier to access to the swap data repository. Swap data repositories shall not offer preferential pricing arrangements to any market participant on any basis, including volume discounts or reductions unless such discounts or reductions apply to all market participants uniformly and are not otherwise established in a manner that would effectively limit the application of such discount or reduction to a select number of market participants.
( 2 ) All fees or charges are to be fully disclosed and transparent to market participants. At a minimum, the swap data repository shall provide a schedule of fees and charges that is accessible by all market participants on its Web site.
( 3 ) The Commission notes that it will not specifically approve the fees charged by swap data repositories. However, any and all fees charged by swap data repositories must be consistent with the principles set forth in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
[76 FR 54575, Sept. 1, 2011, as amended at 85 FR 75662, Nov. 25, 2020]
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2459 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2459

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on yarn of combed Kashmir 
                   (cashmere) and yarn of camel 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 extend the temporary suspension of duty on yarn of combed Kashmir 
                   (cashmere) and yarn of camel hair.

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

SECTION 1. YARN OF COMBED KASHMIR (CASHMERE) OR YARN OF CAMEL HAIR.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.03.01 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to yarn of combed Kashmir 
(cashmere) or yarn of camel hair) is amended by striking ``12/31/2006'' 
and inserting ``12/31/2008''.
    (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>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-2327

RONALD LEE COOK,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

KRAFT FOODS GLOBAL, INCORPORATED; ALTRIA

GROUP, INCORPORATED; THOMAS CARLYLE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (CA-05-576-3-RLW)

Submitted: May 22, 2006 Decided: June 8, 2006

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronald Lee Cook, Appellant Pro Se. King Fitchett Tower, Durward

Earl Baggett, IV, WILLIAMS MULLEN, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Ronald L. Cook appeals from the district court’s order

denying his motion to remand and dismissing his complaint for

failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and the

arguments of the parties, and we affirm the denial of the motion to

remand and the dismissal of Cook’s retaliatory discharge claim for

the reasons stated by the district court from the bench. (See

Hearing Transcript at 14-17). 

Regarding Cook’s common law tort claims, the district

court did not specify a reason for dismissing these claims.

However, while the liberal pleading requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P.

8(a) demand only a “short and plain” statement of the claim, a

plaintiff must often offer more detail than the bald statement that

he has a valid claim of some type against the defendant.

Trulock v. Freeh, 275 F.3d 391, 405 (4th Cir. 2001). “The presence

[ ] of a few conclusory legal terms does not insulate a complaint

from dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) when the facts alleged in the

complaint” do not support the legal conclusion. Young v. City of

Mount Ranier, 238 F.3d 567, 577 (4th Cir. 2001) (dismissing

Fourteenth Amendment claims where complaint alleged deliberate

indifference but included no facts to support allegation).

In Cook’s complaint, he asserted that his employer

committed “grievous” torts by “committing perjury, slander,

accusing the plaintiff of filing a false workers compensation
- 3 -

claim, malingering, ploys, and has allowed Personnel Manager Thomas

Carlyle to carry out a personal vendetta.” Cook offered no facts,

dates, or details to support his claims either in his complaint, in

response to the motion to dismiss, or on appeal. Accordingly, we

hold that the district court did not err in dismissing these causes

of action.

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the

district court. 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
§ 3.3 Definitions. When used in this part, the following terms have the meanings indicated: ( a ) *Employee* means ( 1 ) an officer or employee of the Department, AID, IDCA, or USICA, including an expert or consultant, however appointed, and
( 2 ) a spouse (unless separated) or a dependent of such a person, as defined in section 152 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (26 U.S.C. 152).
( b ) *Foreign government* means: ( 1 ) Any unit of foreign governmental authority, including any foreign national, State, local, or municipal government;
( 2 ) any international or multinational organization whose membership is composed of any unit of foreign government as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section;
( 3 ) any agent or representative of any such unit or organization, while acting as such;
( c ) *Gift* means a tangible or intangible present (other than a decoration) tendered by, or received from, a foreign government;
( d ) *Decoration* means an order, device, medal, badge, insignia, emblem or award tendered by, or received from, a foreign government;
( e ) *Minimal value* means retail value in the United States at the time of acceptance of $100 or less, except that on January 1, 1981, and at 3-year intervals thereafter, “minimal value” is to be redefined in regulations prescribed by the Administrator of General Services, in consultation with the Secretary of State, to reflect changes in the consumer price index for the immediately preceding 3-year period.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Omtool, Ltd. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, RobertL. Voelk, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, to my knowledge, that:

 

(1)                                 TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2)                                 Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Robert  L. Voelk    |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
| Robert L. Voelk         |
| Chief Executive Officer |
| August 8, 2003     |

 

----
#### In the Matter of Demildra H.-A. and Others, Infants. Jacqueline H., Appellant; Little Flower Children’s Services, Respondent.

[715 NYS2d 313]

—Orders, Family Court, New York County (Susan Larabee, J.), entered on or about October 14, 1998, unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Application by appellant’s assigned counsel to withdraw is granted *(see, Matter of Louise Wise Servs.,*131 AD2d 306). We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no non-frivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Tom, Mazzarelli and Rubin, JJ.
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GALLUP, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

BUSINESS RESEARCH BUREAU (PVT.)

LTD., d/b/a GALLUP PAKISTAN, IJAZ

SHAFI GILANI, GALLUP BUSINESS

RESEARCH SERVICES (PVT.) LTD.,

d/b/a PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD.,

Defendants. /

No. C 08-01577 WHA

ORDER REGARDING

DISCOVERY MOTION

Newly appointed counsel for defendant Ijaz Shafi Gilani shall please respond to the

administrative motion filed by plaintiff BY NOON ON MONDAY, APRIL 19.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 15, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-01577-WHA Document 121 Filed 04/15/10 Page 1 of 1
#### FITZGERALD v. NEW YORK CITY RY. CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

March 21, 1905.)

Street Railroads—Injuries to Pedestrians—Contributory Negligence.

It is not contributory negligence, as a matter of law, for a person to-cross a street railway track between two motionless cars.

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Sixth District.

Action by William T. Fitzgerald, by his guardian, against the New York City Railway Company. From a Municipal Court judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Argued before SCOTT, O’GORMAN, and BLANCHARD, JJ.

James H. Hickey, for appellant.

William E. Weaver, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

It cannot be said to be contributory negligence, as a matter of law, for a person to cross a street railway track between two motionless cars. The circumstances under which this accident happened made it incumbent upon defendant to explain, how it happened that the car started and struck the plaintiff. The-dismissal of the complaint was error.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Oscar Rene ROMERO, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-20393

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

May 2, 2007.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Oscar Rene Romero preserves for further review his contention that his sentence is unreasonable because this court’s *post-Booker*
      ****
      **rulings have effectively reinstated the mandatory Sentencing Guideline regime condemned in *Booker.*Romero concedes that his argument is foreclosed by *United States v. Mares,*402 F.3d 511 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*546 U.S. 828, 126 S.Ct. 43, 163 L.Ed.2d 76 (2005), and its progeny, which have outlined this court’s methodology for reviewing sentences for reasonableness. Romero also preserves for further review his contention that his sentence is unreasonable because of the court’s refusal to consider his postsentencing rehabilitation. Romero concedes that this argument is foreclosed by *United States v. Tzep-Mejia,*461 F.3d 522, 527 (5th Cir.2006), which held that *“Booker*does not give sentencing courts the discretion to impose a non-Guideline sentence based on the courts’ disagreement with Congressional and Sentencing Commission policy.” The Government’s motion for summary affir-*322manee is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

*United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).
§ 51.8 Submission of currently valid passport. ( a ) When applying for a new passport in person or by mail, an applicant must submit for cancellation any currently valid passport of the same type.
( b ) When applying for a new passport on-line, an applicant must have the currently valid passport of the same type available for cancellation via the on-line process.
( c ) If an applicant is unable to produce a passport under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, they must submit a signed statement in the form prescribed by the Department setting forth the circumstances regarding the disposition of the passport.
( d ) The Department may deny or limit a passport if the applicant has failed to provide a sufficient and credible explanation for lost, stolen, altered or mutilated passport(s) previously issued to the applicant, after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so.
[86 FR 72523, Dec. 22, 2021]
#### Bridget Heisler, Respondent, v. John Stewart, Appellant, Impleaded with Others.

Motions granted, with ten dollars costs in each motion, unless the appellant, within thirty days, flies and serves printed case on appeal, and pays said costs; in which event motions are denied, without costs.
§ 225.120 Evaluation and disposition of applications and proposals for research to be conducted or supported by a Federal department or agency. ( a ) The department or agency head will evaluate all applications and proposals involving human subjects submitted to the Federal department or agency through such officers and employees of the Federal department or agency and such experts and consultants as the department or agency head determines to be appropriate. This evaluation will take into consideration the risks to the subjects, the adequacy of protection against these risks, the potential benefits of the research to the subjects and others, and the importance of the knowledge gained or to be gained.
( b ) On the basis of this evaluation, the department or agency head may approve or disapprove the application or proposal, or enter into negotiations to develop an approvable one.
#### § 312.630 Debarment.

*Debarment* means an action taken by a Federal agency to prohibit a recipient from participating in Federal Government procurement contracts and covered nonprocurement transactions. A recipient so prohibited is debarred, in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation for procurement contracts (48 CFR part 9, subpart 9.4) and the common rule, Government-wide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement), that implements Executive Order 12549 and Executive Order 12689.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002

(18 U.S.C. 1350)



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of (18 U.S.C. 1350), the undersigned officer of Blue Water Vaccines Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does
hereby certify, to the best of such officer’s knowledge and belief, that:



(1) The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2021 (the “Form 10-K”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(2) The information contained in the Form 10-K
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date: March 31, 2022 | /s/ Joseph Hernandez   
|-------------------- | -----------------------
|                     | Joseph Hernandez,      
|                     | Chief Executive Officer
### §15707. Coordination

The Secretary of Commerce, the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the heads of other Federal departments and agencies carrying out activities under this chapter and the statutes amended by this chapter shall work together to ensure that research, technologies, and response techniques are shared among the programs authorized in this chapter in order to coordinate the Nation's efforts to reduce vulnerability to the hazards described in this chapter.

(Pub. L. 108–360, title II, §209, Oct. 25, 2004, 118 Stat. 1680.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this title", meaning title II of Pub. L. 108–360, Oct. 25, 2004, 118 Stat. 1675, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of title II to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 15701 of this title and Tables.
Class |
Class II
Class III
Class IV

Preserve the existing character of the landscape
Retain the existing character of the landscape
Partially retain the existing character of the landscape
Management activities may dominate the landscape

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM

CARBON

ALBANY
LARAMIE

1°) 10 20 40 60 80 100
Kilometers
0 5 10 20 30 40 50
aaa
Miles
Map 2-49

Visual Resource Management
Alternative 3
§ 35.35 The record. ( a ) The hearing will be recorded and transcribed. Transcripts may be obtained following the hearing from the ALJ at a cost not to exceed the actual cost of duplication.
( b ) The transcript of testimony, exhibits and other evidence admitted at the hearing, and all papers and requests filed in the proceeding constitute the record for the decision by the ALJ and the authority head.
( c ) The record may be inspected and copied (upon payment of a reasonable fee) by anyone, unless otherwise ordered by the ALJ pursuant to § 35.24.
**
Exhibit 34.2 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm (Ernst & Young LLP) 

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

The Board of Directors 

U.S. Bank National Association 

We have examined management’s****assertion, included in the accompanying Report on Assessment ofCompliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria, that U.S. Bank National Association (the “Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122 (d) of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the U.S.Bank Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities****Platform (the “Platform”), for which the Company provides trustee, securities administration, registrar and paying agent services, as of and for the year ended March 31, 2020, exceptfor****servicing criteria Items 1122 (d)(1)(i)-(v), 1122 (d)(2)(i), 1122 (d)(2)(iii), 1122 (d)(2)(v)-(vii), 1122 (d)(3)(i), and 1122 (d)(4)(i)-(xv), which the Company has determined are not applicable to the activities it performs with respectto the servicing platform covered by this report. Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with those servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’scompliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. 

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established bythe American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with theapplicable servicing criteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our examination included testing of less than all of the individual asset-backed transactions and securities that comprise thePlatform, testing of less than all of the servicing activities related to the Platform, and determining whether the Company processed those selected transactions and performed those selected activities in compliance with the servicing criteria.Furthermore, our procedures were limited to the selected transactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report. Our procedures were not designed to determine whether errors may have occurred eitherprior to or subsequent to our tests that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report for the selected transactions or any other transactions. We believe that the evidencewe obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. 

Our examination does not provide a legal determination on theCompany’s compliance with the servicing criteria. 

In our opinion, management’s assertion that the Company complied with the aforementionedservicing criteria as of and for the year ended March 31, 2020, for the U.S. Bank Corporate Trust Asset-Backed Securities Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

Minneapolis,Minnesota 

May 28, 2020 

 
18 

**
§ 18.2 Definitions. For the purpose of this part— ( a ) The term *Department* means the Department of State and includes the Foreign Service.
( b ) The term *Director General* means the Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Personnel.
( c ) The term *practice* means any informal or formal appearance before, or, with the intent to influence, any oral or written communication to the Department on a pending matter of business on behalf of any other person (except the United States).
#### § 401.21 Consultation.

The Commission may meet or consult with the applicant, the Governments and other persons or their counsel at any time regarding the plan of hearing, the mode of conducting the inquiry, the admitting or proof of certain facts or for any other purpose.
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

AdministrationEducational QualityFundamental ConceptsLearning ActivitiesLearning ModulesManagement DevelopmentPersonnel ManagementPreschool EducationProfessional DevelopmentTeamworkValues Clarification

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
### §3796gg–0b. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 3796gg–0b was editorially reclassified as section 10444 of Title 34, Crime Control and Law Enforcement.