alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Provision Effective 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2

1. Standard deduction set at 2 times single for married 

filing jointly ......................................................................... tyba 12/31/00 --- -4.1 -6.0 -6.4 -6.5 -6.8 -7.0 -7.1 

2. 15% rate bracket set at 2 times single for married 

filing jointly, phased in over 6 years; repeal AMT tyba 12/31/02 & reductions of refundable credits ....................................... tyba 12/31/01 --- --- [2] -1.8 -4.3 -9.7 -12.2 -14.1 -

3. $2,000 increase to the beginning and ending income

levels for the EIC phaseout for married filing tyba 12/31/00 --- [2] -1.2 -1.2 -1.2 -1.3 -1.3 -1.3 jointly [1] ............................................................................

 NET TOTAL ............................................................................................................ --- -4.1 -7.2 -9.4 -12.0 -17.8 -20.5 -22.5 -Joint Committee on Taxation -------------------------------------- NOTE: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Legend for "Effective" column: tyba = taxable years beginning after 

[1] Estimate includes the following effects on fiscal year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2

outlays ............................................................................................................ --- [3] 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 

[2] Loss of less than $50 million. [3] Less than $50 million. 

[Billions of Dollars]

ESTIMATED REVENUE EFFECTS OF THE CHAIRMAN’S MODIFIED AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE TO 

Fiscal Years 2000 - 2010

SCHEDULED FOR MARKUP BY THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS ON FEBRUARY 2, 2000 

THE "MARRIAGE TAX PENALTY RELIEF ACT OF 2000,"
### §4912. Records, reports, and information

#### (a) Duties of manufacturers of products

Each manufacturer of a product to which regulations under section 4905 or 4907 of this title apply shall—

(1) establish and maintain such records, make such reports, provide such information, and make such tests, as the Administrator may reasonably require to enable him to determine whether such manufacturer has acted or is acting in compliance with this chapter,

(2) upon request of an officer or employee duly designated by the Administrator, permit such officer or employee at reasonable times to have access to such information and the results of such tests and to copy such records, and

(3) to the extent required by regulations of the Administrator, make products coming off the assembly line or otherwise in the hands of the manufacturer available for testing by the Administrator.

#### (b) Confidential information; disclosure

(1) All information obtained by the Administrator or his representatives pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, which information contains or relates to a trade secret or other matter referred to in section 1905 of title 18, shall be considered confidential for the purpose of that section, except that such information may be disclosed to other Federal officers or employees, in whose possession it shall remain confidential, or when relevant to the matter in controversy in any proceeding under this chapter.

(2) Nothing in this subsection shall authorize the withholding of information by the Administrator, or by any officers or employees under his control, from the duly authorized committees of the Congress.

#### (c) Violations and penalties

Any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation, or certification in any application, record, report, plan, or other document filed or required to be maintained under this chapter or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this chapter, shall upon conviction be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000, or by imprisonment for not more than six months, or by both.

(Pub. L. 92–574, §13, Oct. 27, 1972, 86 Stat. 1244.)
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 05-2098

No. 05-2181 

ATTREZZI, LLC,

Plaintiff, Appellee/Cross-Appellant,

v.

MAYTAG CORPORATION,

Defendant, Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

ERRATA

The opinion of this Court, issued on January 27, 2006, should

be amended as follows.

On cover page, replace present attorney listings with:

Edward A. Haffer with whom Sheehan Phinney Bass & Green, P.A.

was on brief for defendant.

James G. Goggin with whom Peter S. Black and Verrill Dana, LLP

were on brief for plaintiff.

On page 2, line 1, delete comma after "LLC" and insert comma

after "("Attrezzi LLC")".
#### City of Chicago, appellee, v. Margery Goodzenski, appellant.

Gen. No. 28,680.

Suit against City of Chicago. Judgment for city. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Howard Hayes, Judge, presiding. Heard in the first division of this court for the first district.

Affirmed for failure of appellant to file record.

See City v. Salmitsky, 210 Ill. App. 159.

Opinion filed June 25, 1923.

No appearance for appellant. No appearance for appellee.

Per Curiam.
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.                  

###### Election Assistance Commission

# AGENCY:

United States Election Assistance Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting for the Technical Guidelines Development Committee. 

# DATES AND TIME:

Tuesday, January 18, 2005 9 a.m.-5 p.m. and Wednesday, January 19, 2005 9 a.m.-5 p.m.

# PLACE:

National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Building 101, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-8900.

# STATUS:

                        This meeting will be open to the public. Due to security requirements advance registration is required. Registration information is available at                         *http://vote.nist.gov.*                         Advance reservation is available until January 12, 2005. There is no fee to attend.                    

# SUMMARY:

The Technical Guidelines Development Committee (the “Development Committee”) has scheduled a plenary meeting for January 18 & 19, 2005. The Committee was established pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 15361(b)(1), to act in the public interest to assist the Executive Director of the Election Assistance Commission in the development of the voluntary voting system guidelines. The Committee held its first organizational meeting on July 9th, 2004. The purpose of this second meeting of the Committee will be to review and approve an outline plan to establish recommendations for voluntary voting system guidelines.

# CONTACT INFORMATION:

                        Allan Eustis 301-975-5099. If a member of the public would like to submit written comments concerning the Committee's affairs at any time before and after the meeting, written comments should be addressed to the contact person indicated above, or to                         *Voting@nist.gov.*

DeForest B. Soaries, Jr.,

Chairman, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

[FR Doc. 04-28054 Filed 12-17-04; 4:03 pm]

BILLING CODE 6820-YN-M
### §7385f. Claims not assignable or transferable; choice of remedies

#### (a) Claims not assignable or transferable

No claim cognizable under this subchapter shall be assignable or transferable.

#### (b) Choice of remedies

No individual may receive more than one payment of compensation under part B.

(Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [div. C, title XXXVI, §3647], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–511; Pub. L. 108–375, div. C, title XXXI, §3162(f), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 2186.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2004—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 108–375 substituted "this subchapter" for "part B".
Exhibit 32.1


Certification of Chief Executive Officer


Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021 (the “Report”) of TriplePoint Private Venture Credit Inc. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, James P. Labe, the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:


(1) The Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.


/s/ James P. LabeName:James P. LabeDate:March 8, 2022
### §8832. Construction loans

#### (a) Authority of Secretary of Energy

Subject to sections 8835 and 8836 of this title, the Secretary of Energy may commit to make, and make, loans for the construction of municipal waste energy projects.

#### (b) Estimated project construction costs as determinative of initial and revised amount of loan; interest rate

(1) Any loan under this section—

(A) may not exceed 80 per centum of the total estimated cost of the construction of the municipal waste energy project involved, and

(B) shall bear interest at a rate determined by the Secretary of Energy (taking into consideration the current average market yield on outstanding marketable obligations of the United States with remaining periods to maturity comparable to the average maturities of such loans) plus not to exceed one per centum, as determined by the Secretary of Energy, and adjusted to the nearest one-eighth of one per centum.

(2) In the event the total estimated costs of construction of the project thereafter exceed the total estimated costs initially determined by the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary may in addition, upon application therefor, make a loan for so much of the additional estimated costs as does not exceed 10 per centum of the initial total estimated costs of construction.

#### (c) Preconditions

A loan may not be made under this section unless the person applying for such loan has established to the satisfaction of the Secretary of Energy that the applicant is unable without such a loan to obtain sufficient credit elsewhere at reasonable rates and terms, taking into consideration prevailing market rates and terms for loans for similar periods of time, to finance the construction of the project for which such loan is sought.

(Pub. L. 96–294, title II, §232, June 30, 1980, 94 Stat. 697.)
```

[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 247 (Monday, December 27, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 77309]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-28234]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activity Under OMB Review

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this notice announces that the Information 
Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below has been forwarded to the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for extension of the currently 
approved collection. The ICR describes the nature of the information 
collection and the expected burden. The Federal Register Notice with a 
60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following collection 
of information was published on July 13, 2004, page 42078.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 26, 2005. A 
comment to OMB is most effective if OMB receives it within 30 days of 
publication.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy Street on (202) 267-9895.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Federal Aviation Administration

    Title: Airport Noise Compatibility Planning.
    Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0517.
    Forms(s): NA.
    Affected Public: A total of 15 airport operators and consultants.
    Abstract: The respondents are those airport operators voluntarily 
submitting noise exposure maps and noise compatibility programs to the 
FAA for review and approval. FAA approval makes airport operators' 
noise compatibility programs eligible for discretionary grant funds set 
aside under the FAA Airport Improvement Program for that purpose.
    Estimated Annual Burden Hours: An estimated 43,650 hours annually.
    Addresses: Send comments to the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention FAA Desk Officer.
    Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of 
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of 
the Department, including whether the information will have practical 
utility; the accuracy of the Department's estimates of the burden of 
the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, 
utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to 
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, 
including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of 
information technology.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 17, 2004.
Judith D. Street,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Standards and Information 
Division, APF-100.
[FR Doc. 04-28234 Filed 12-23-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
```
§ 521.1 Basis and purpose. ( a ) *Basis.* This part implements the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act of 1986, Public Law 99-509, sections 6101-6104, 100 Stat. 1874 (October 21, 1986), codified at 31 U.S.C. 3801-3812. The Act requires each authority head to promulgate regulations necessary to implement the provisions of the statute (31 U.S.C. 3809).
( b ) *Purpose.* ( 1 ) This part establishes administrative procedures for imposing civil penalties and assessments against persons who make, submit, or present, or cause to be made, submitted, or presented, false, fictitious, or fraudulent claims or written statements to the Broadcasting Board of Governors or to its agents, and
( 2 ) Specifies the hearing and appeal rights of persons subject to allegations of liability for such penalties and assessments.
( c ) *Special considerations abroad.* Where a party, witness or material evidence in a proceeding under these regulations is located abroad, the investigating official, reviewing official or ALJ, as the case may be, may adjust the provisions below for service, filing of documents, time limitations, and related matters to meet special problems arising out of that location.
##### 



Exhibit 99.2 ANNUAL STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCEPrincipal Life Income Fundings Trust 2004-14 (the Trust) I, Nancy H. Forte, a duly elected and acting officer of Citibank, N.A. (Indenture Trustee),
do hereby certify on behalf of the Indenture Trustee, that: 1. I have reviewed and examined the performance by the Indenture Trustee of the application of
trust money collected by the Indenture Trustee pursuant to Section 5.02 and, if applicable, Section
6.06 of the Indenture pursuant to which the Trusts notes were issued during the fiscal year ending
December 31, 2004 (the Relevant Year); and 2. Based upon my review and examination described in 1 above, and except as provided in the
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Compliance, dated March 15, 2005,
prepared by the Ernst & Young LLP substantially in accordance with Section 4.05 of the Expense and
Indemnity Agreement, to the best of my knowledge, the application of trust money collected by the
Indenture Trustee pursuant to Section 5.02 and, if applicable, Section 6.06 of the Indenture was
performed in accordance with the terms of the Indenture throughout the Relevant Year. CITIBANK, N.A., as Indenture Trustee By:
    /s/ Nancy H. ForteName:
    Nancy H. ForteTitle:
    Assistant Vice President Date: March 29, 2005
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jose Alfredo GLORIA-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-41017

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

April 18, 2007.

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

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Alfredo Gloria-Hernandez (Gloria) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Gloria has not filed a response. Our independent review of counsel’s brief and the record *262discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2.

*

 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.
§ 1000.336 How may an Indian tribe, TDHE, or HUD challenge data or appeal HUD formula determinations? ( a ) An Indian tribe, TDHE, or HUD may challenge data used in the IHBG Formula and HUD formula determinations regarding: ( 1 ) U.S. Census data;
( 2 ) Tribal enrollment;
( 3 ) Formula area;
( 4 ) Formula Current Assisted Stock (FCAS);
( 5 ) Total Development Cost (TDC);
( 6 ) Fair Market Rents (FMRs);
( 7 ) Indian Health Service projections based upon birth and death rate data provided by the National Center for Health Statistics; and
( 8 ) The undisbursed funds factor.
( b ) An Indian tribe or TDHE may not challenge data or HUD formula determinations regarding Allowable Expense Level (AEL) and the inflation factor.
( c ) The challenge and the collection of data and the appeal of HUD formula determinations is an allowable cost for IHBG funds.
( d ) An Indian tribe or TDHE that seeks to appeal data or a HUD formula determination, and has data in its possession that are acceptable to HUD, shall submit the challenge or appeal in writing with data and proper documentation to HUD. An Indian tribe or TDHE may appeal the undisbursed funds factor no later than 30 days after the receipt of the formula determination. Data used to challenge data contained in the U.S. Census must meet the requirements described in § 1000.330(a). Further, in order for a census challenge to be considered for the upcoming fiscal year allocation, documentation must be submitted by March 30th.
( e ) HUD shall respond to all challenges or appeals no later than 45 days after receipt and either approve or deny the appeal in writing, setting forth the reasons for its decision. ( 1 ) If HUD challenges the validity of the submitted data HUD and the Indian tribe or TDHE shall attempt in good faith to resolve any discrepancies so that such data may be included in the formula allocation.
( 2 ) If HUD denies a challenge or appeal, the Indian tribe or TDHE may request reconsideration of HUD's denial within 30 calendar days of receipt of HUD's denial. The request shall be in writing and set forth justification for reconsideration.
( 3 ) HUD shall in writing affirm or deny the Indian tribe's or TDHE's request for reconsideration, setting forth HUD's reasons for the decision, within 20 calendar days of receiving the request. HUD's denial of a request for reconsideration shall constitute final agency action.
( 4 ) If HUD approves the Indian tribe or TDHE's appeal, HUD will adjust to the Indian tribe's or TDHE's subsequent fiscal year allocation to include only the disputed fiscal year(s).
( f ) In the event HUD questions whether the data contained in the formula accurately represents the Indian tribe's need, HUD shall request the Indian tribe to submit supporting documentation to justify the data and, if applicable, to provide a commitment to serve the population indicated in the geographic area.
[72 FR 20025, Apr. 20, 2007, as amended at 81 FR 83681, Nov. 22, 2016]
Case 3:08-cv-05623-VRW Document 30 Filed 02/22/10 Page 1 of 2
2/22/2010 

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Vaughn R Walker

Case 3:08-cv-05623-VRW Document 30 Filed 02/22/10 Page 2 of 2
#### § 92.2 Description of overseas notarial functions of the Department of State, record of acts.

The overseas notarial function of notarizing officers of the Department of State is similar to the function of a notary public in the United States. See § 22.5(b) of this chapter concerning the giving of receipts for fees collected and the maintenance of a register serving the same purposes as the record which notaries are usually expected or required to keep of their official acts.

[60 FR 51721, Oct. 3, 1995]