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

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2975 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Benzenesulfonic acid, 2,2′-[(1-methyl1,2-ethanediyl)bis[imino(6-fluoro-1,3,5-tria ine-4,2-diyl)imino[2- 

[(aminocarbonyl)amino]-4,1-phenylene]az ]]bis[5-[(4-sulfophenyl)azo]-, 

sodium salt. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 17, 2005 

Mrs. MYRICK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on Benzenesulfonic acid, 

2,2′-[(1-methyl-1,2-ethanediyl)bis[imino(6-fluoro-1,3,5- 

tria ine-4,2-diyl)imino[2-[(aminocarbonyl)amino]-4,1- 

phenylene]az ]]bis[5-[(4-sulfophenyl)azo]-, sodium salt. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2975 IH 

1 SECTION 1. BENZENESULFONIC ACID, 2,2′-[(1-METHYL-1,2- 

2 ETHANEDIYL)BIS[IMINO(6-FLUORO-1,3,5-TRI3 AZINE-4,2-DIYL)IMINO[2- 

4 [(AMINOCARBONYL)AMINO]-4,1-PHEN5 YLENE]AZO]]BIS[5-[(4-SULFOPHENYL)AZO]-, 

6 SODIUM SALT. 

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

8 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

9 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

10 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.22.04 Benzenesulfonic acid, 2,2′- 

[(1-methyl-1,2- 

ethanediyl)bis[imino(6- 

fluoro-1,3,5-triazine-4,2- 

diyl)imino[2- 

[(aminocarbonyl)amino]-4,1- 

phenylene]azo]]bis[5-[(4- 

sulfophenyl)azo]-, sodium 

salt (CAS No. 149850–31– 

7) (provided for in subheading 3204.16.30) ............ Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 

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

12 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

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

14 the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ
### §336. Further extension in addition to that authorized by sections 333 to 335 of this title

The Secretary of the Interior may, in his discretion, in addition to the extensions authorized by sections 333 to 335 of this title or other law existing prior to February 25, 1925, grant to any entryman under the desert-land laws of the United States a further extension of time of not to exceed three years within which to make final proof: Provided, That such entryman shall, by his corroborated affidavit, filed in the land office of the district where such land is located, show to the satisfaction of the Secretary that because of unavoidable delay in the construction of the irrigation works intended to convey water to the land embraced in his entry, he is, without fault on his part, unable to make proof of the reclamation and cultivation of said lands as required by law within the time limited therefor: And provided further, That the entryman, his heirs, or his duly qualified assignee, has in good faith complied with the requirements of law as to yearly expenditures and proof thereof, and shall show, under rules and regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior, that there is a reasonable prospect that if the extension is granted he will be able to make the final proof of reclamation, irrigation, and cultivation required by law.

(Feb. 25, 1925, ch. 329, 43 Stat. 982.)
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 26, 2016

NO. 03-16-00125-CV

Carolyn Barnes, Appellant

v.

Alan Schreiber, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 419TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND BOURLAND

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the order signed by the district court on February 8, 2016. Having 

reviewed the record, it appears to the Court that appellant has not prosecuted her appeal by 

failing to file a brief and did not comply with a notice from the Clerk of this Court. Therefore, 

the Court dismisses the appeal for want of prosecution. Because appellant is indigent and unable 

to pay costs, no adjudication of costs is made.

.
|USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS                                         |                                  | USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS |                                  | USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS
|------------------------------------------------------------------------ | -------------------------------- | -------------------------------- | -------------------------------- | --------------------------------
|                                                                         | USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS |                                  | USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS
|                                                                         | USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS
|Earth Surface Processes Terrain Modeling and Geographic Analysis Project
|Publications - USGS Data Series 136                                     

|Home
Projects
Publications
Links
Contact
|--------------------------------------------
|                                            

|AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices                                                                                                                            
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey
        URL: Enter Information
        Page Contact Information: Contact Peter G.Chirico
Page Last Modified:

---
From: Richard Parker [mailto:richardparkerdc@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 12:12 PM
To: Alex Hofmann; Andrew Delaski; Aris Marantan; Art Rosenfeld; Bob Saint; Bob Smith; Brian Coffey; Caitlin Johnson; Carlos Gaytan; Caskey, John; charlie dr exler; Charlie Stevens; Chris Bolduc; Chris Brown; Clark Silcox; Creevy, Jim; Dan Cohen; Daniel Young; Eric Peterson; Freeman, Jeremiah; Gary Fernstrom; Greg Coulter; Greg Rosenquist; Hirsch, Bruce R; James Lass; Jennifer Tiedeman; Jerry Corkran; Jerry Hodge; Jerry Schoen; Jim Raba; Joanna Mauer; John Cymbalsky; John Rossetti; Katie Coughlin; Ken Winder; Mahesh P. Sampat; Matthew Nardotti; Maxi ne Savitz; Meg Waltner; Meyers, Aaron; Michael Hyland; Michael Rivest; Millure, Dave; Phil Harter; Phil Hopkinson; Polinski, Raymond; Puesh Kumar; Richard W. Parker; Rick Anderson; Rob Greeson; Robert Berman; Robert van Buskirk; Robin Roy; Ryan, Paul; Scott Beck; Simmons, Chuck; Steve Nadel; St eve Rosenstock; Thomas Petrosino; Tim Ballo; Tom Eckman; Wes Patterson; Zhimei Luo Subject: EL between 0 and 1 for liquid immersed



### Colleagues,

I understand that LBNL is currently running an LCC/NIA for a EL between 0 and 1 for all liquid immersed design lines and will post it once it is ready. De pending on their perspective, members may or may not find such an EL an intere sting point of reference for negotiation or an acceptable outcome, but the analysis was requested by multiple members, and promised, and will be delivered as soon as it is ready.

All best, Richard Parker Facilitator
#### § 25.15 Retroactive application of Board regulations.

Limitations on participation in HUD mortgage insurance programs proposed or imposed prior to August 12, 1992, under an ancillary procedure shall not be affected by this part. This part shall apply to sanctions initiated after the effective date of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (December 15, 1989) regardless of the date of the cause giving rise to the sanction.

[57 FR 31051, July 13, 1992. Redesignated at 61 FR 685, Jan. 9, 1996]
df Pathtinder

Reservoir

63. 62 R61W 6q

°
o
nN
3S
b
o
Q
So
@
So

HB Oil and Gas Fields 400

Miles

Map 3-5
Oil and Gas Fields

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY THE BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM
a6502225ex10-3.htm


Exhibit 10.3












October 28, 2010







Mr. Walt Oliwa


36 Marton Drive


Bedford, NH  03110







Dear Walt:







This letter will confirm the April 4, 2007 agreement between Valpey-Fisher Corporation (the “Company”) and you concerning a retention bonus payable to you under certain circumstances.







The Company and you agree that effective October 28, 2010 the second, third, and fourth sentences of the second paragraph of the Letter Agreement are hereby amended to read as follows:


 


 



	 	
As an incentive for your continued employment with the Company, and your efforts on behalf of the strategic alternatives, the Company hereby agrees to pay you a bonus of one times your current base salary in the event of a change  in control of the Company on or prior to December 31, 2011.  Any bonus payment payable hereunder  in the event of a change in control will be paid no  later than March 15, following the end of the calendar year in which  the change in control occurs; provided however that no bonus payment will be made if you have incurred prior to the first business day immediately following such change in control. “Separation from Service” means, your “separation from service”, within the meaning of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1980 as amended (the “Code’), from the Company or successor employer resulting from change in control.  To the extent required by the definition of “separation from service” under Section 409A of the Code, “Separation from Service” shall mean your separation from service (as so defined) from both the Company or successor employer resulting from the change in control, and all other persons with whom the Company or such successor employer would be considered a “single employer under Section 414(b) or (c) of the Code, but replacing the phrase “at least 80 %” with the phrase “at least 50% where it appears in Section 1563(a)(1), (2), and (3) of the Code and in the regulations under Section 414(c).

	 





 


Please indicate your agreement by signing this letter in the space provided below.


 





	 	
Sincerely,

	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	VALPEY-FISHER CORPORATION	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	
Date

	
By: 

	/s/ Ted Valpey, Jr.	 
	 	 	Ted Valpey, Jr.	 
	 	 	Chairman	 
	 	 	 	 







 


AGREED AND ACCEPTED:







/s/ Walt Oliwa

Walt Oliwa


 


 


 


 


-20-
###### Editorial Note on Part 200

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

#### § 200.927 Incorporation by reference of minimum property standards.

The Minimum Property Standards as contained in the handbooks identified in § 200.929(b) are incorporated by reference into this section as though set forth in full in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

[50 FR 39592, Sept. 29, 1985]
### §1638. National Environmental Policy Act

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (83 Stat. 852) [42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.] shall not be construed, in whole or in part, as requiring the preparation or submission of an environmental impact statement for withdrawals, conveyances, regulations, orders, easement determinations, or other actions which lead to the issuance of conveyances to Natives or Native Corporations, pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act [43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.], or this Act. Nothing in this section shall be construed as affirming or denying the validity of any withdrawals by the Secretary under section 14(h)(3) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act [43 U.S.C. 1613(h)(3)].

(Pub. L. 96–487, title IX, §910, Dec. 2, 1980, 94 Stat. 2447.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 91–190, Jan. 1, 1970, 83 Stat. 852, which is classified generally to chapter 55 (§4321 et seq.) of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 4321 of Title 42 and Tables.

The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 92–203, Dec. 18, 1971, 85 Stat. 688, which is classified generally to chapter 33 (§1601 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1601 of this title and Tables.

This Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 96–487, Dec. 2, 1980, 94 Stat. 2371, known as the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 3101 of Title 16, Conservation, and Tables.
Case 3:09-cv-01048-EDL Document 29 Filed 02/05/10 Page 1 of 3
Case 3:09-cv-01048-EDL Document 29 Filed 02/05/10 Page 2 of 3
Scott v. Alameda County, et al. CV09-01048 

Stip/Order Re Dismissal 3 Scott/p/StipDismissal10a25 

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

ORDER 

 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, this case is hereby dismissed with prejudice, with all 

parties to bear their own fees and costs. 

SO ORDERED this ___ day of ____________, 2010. 

 

 __________________________________ 

 Elizabeth D. Laporte 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

5th February 

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte

Case 3:09-cv-01048-EDL Document 29 Filed 02/05/10 Page 3 of 3
### §1181i. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 1181i was editorially reclassified as section 2633 of this title.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-40110

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

HUGO ISRAEL ZACARIAS-CARBAJAL,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-03-CR-838-1

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

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Hugo Israel Zacarias-Carbajal appeals the sentence imposed

following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United

States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. 

Zacarias-Carbajal contends that the "felony" and "aggravated

felony" provisions of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(1) and (2) are

unconstitutional. He therefore argues that his conviction must

be reduced to one under the lesser included offense found in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), his judgment must be reformed to reflect a

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 18, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 04-40110

-2-

conviction only under that provision, and his sentence must be

vacated and the case remanded for resentencing to no more than

two years' imprisonment and one year of supervised release. 

 In Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235

(1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of

separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing

provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. 

Zacarias-Carbajal acknowledges that his arguments are foreclosed

by Almendarez-Torres, but he asserts that the decision has been

cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490

(2000). He seeks to preserve his arguments for further review. 

 Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres

"unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule

it." Dabeit, 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and

citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.
### §618e. Interest payments; rate

Whenever by the terms of the Project Act [43 U.S.C. 617 et seq.] or this subchapter payment of interest is provided for, and whenever interest shall enter into any computation thereunder, such interest shall be computed at the rate of 3 per centum per annum, compounded annually: Provided, That the respective rates of interest on appropriated funds advanced for the visitor facilities program, as described in section 619(a) of this title, shall be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, taking into consideration average market yields on outstanding marketable obligations of the United States with remaining periods to maturity comparable to the reimbursement period of the program during the month preceding the fiscal year in which the costs of the program are incurred. To the extent that more than one interest rate is determined pursuant to the preceding sentence, the Secretary of the Treasury shall establish for repayment purposes an interest rate at a weighted average of the rates so determined.

(July 19, 1940, ch. 643, §6, 54 Stat. 777; Pub. L. 98–381, title I, §104(a)(5), Aug. 17, 1984, 98 Stat. 1335.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Project Act, referred to in text, is defined in section 618k of this title.

#### Amendments

1984—Pub. L. 98–381 inserted proviso relating to rates of interest on appropriated funds advanced for visitors' facilities program.
### §1222. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, act Aug. 24, 1954, ch. 900, §2, 68 Stat. 790, which related to notice of opening of lands to purchase under former sections 1221 to 1223 of this title, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
#### § 96.23 Scope.

The provisions in this subpart govern the evaluation of agencies and persons for accreditation or approval.

[79 FR 40634, July 14, 2014]
#### § 3.550 Sex as a bona fide occupational qualification.

A recipient may take action otherwise prohibited by §§ 3.500 through 3.550 provided it is shown that sex is a bona fide occupational qualification for that action, such that consideration of sex with regard to such action is essential to successful operation of the employment function concerned. A recipient shall not take action pursuant to this section that is based upon alleged comparative employment characteristics or stereotyped characterizations of one or the other sex, or upon preference based on sex of the recipient, employees, students, or other persons, but nothing contained in this section shall prevent a recipient from considering an employee's sex in relation to employment in a locker room or toilet facility used only by members of one sex.
### §5026. Adjustments to Federal financial assistance

(a)(1) In determining the amount of Federal financial assistance to be provided under this subchapter to applicants, the Director shall consider the impact of changes in the Consumer Price Index For All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor on the administrative costs of operating the projects for which such assistance will be provided.

(2) The Director shall, to the fullest extent practicable, make appropriate adjustments in the amount referred to in paragraph (1) to ensure the effective administration of such projects.

(b) The Director shall take reasonable actions to inform applicants for such assistance that such adjustments may be available.

(Pub. L. 93–113, title II, §226, as added Pub. L. 101–204, title V, §506, Dec. 7, 1989, 103 Stat. 1818; amended Pub. L. 103–82, title III, §350, Sept. 21, 1993, 107 Stat. 906; Pub. L. 104–66, title II, §2011, Dec. 21, 1995, 109 Stat. 726.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1995—Pub. L. 104–66 in subsec. (a), redesignated par. (1)(A) as (1), redesignated par. (1)(B) as (2) and substituted "paragraph (1)" for "subparagraph (A)" after "referred to in", redesignated former par. (2) as subsec. (b), and struck out former subsec. (b) which read as follows: "The Director shall submit, once every 2 years, to the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Labor and Human Resources of the Senate, a report on the extent to which adjustments are made under subsection (a) of this section."

1993—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 103–82 struck out par. (1) designation before "The Director shall", substituted ", once every 2 years" for "annually", and struck out par. (2) which read as follows: "With respect to each of parts A, B, and C of this subchapter, the Director shall include in such report—

"(A) a summary of the number of, and purposes for which, such adjustments are requested by the recipients of grants and contracts under parts A, B, and C of this subchapter, respectively;

"(B) a description of the extent that such requests are accommodated; and

"(C) a statement explaining the decisions made by the Director with respect to the requested adjustments."

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

#### Effective Date of 1993 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 103–82 effective Oct. 1, 1993, see section 392 of Pub. L. 103–82, set out as a note under section 4951 of this title.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

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

No. 98-60529 Conference Calendar

RICHARD AMOS MCGEE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus JAMES ANDERSON; WALTER BOOKER; BARBARA BAILEY; UNKNOWN ARP STAFF, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:98-CV-10-B-D

-------------------- August 27, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Richard Amos McGee (Mississippi prisoner # 71701) appeals the district court’s dismissal of his pro se and in forma pauperis (IFP) civil rights complaint wherein he complained of the forfeiture of 60 days of his accrued earned time based on the dismissal, as frivolous, of a previous lawsuit by him. See Miss. Code Ann. § 47-5-138(3)(a),(b) (1996). In addition to challenging application of the statute, McGee argued that the defendants “took it upon themselves” to apply the statute andNo. 98-60529 -2- thus acted in a retaliatory manner. McGee further alleged that the defendants had continued their retaliation by not granting him administrative relief from the forfeiture. A district court may dismiss a complaint as frivolous if it has no arguable basis either in law or in fact. Siglar v. Hightower , 112 F.3d 191, 193 (5th Cir. 1997). We review such a dismissal for an abuse of discretion. Id

. Insofar as McGee is seeking damages and the restoration of earned time based on the allegedly improper application of Miss. Code. Ann. § 47-5-138, the district court did not abuse its discretion by concluding that McGee may not raise this claim in a § 1983 action and must first pursue such a claim through a writ of habeas corpus. See Heck v. Humphrey , 512 U.S. 477, 481-82 (1994); Clarke v. Stalder , 154 F.3d 186, 189 (5th Cir. 1998), cert. denied , 119 S. Ct. 1052 (1999). Favorable termination is not, however, a requisite of a retaliation claim. See Woods v. Smith , 60 F.3d 1161, 1164 (5th Cir. 1995). Nevertheless, because McGee’s allegations of retaliation are insufficient to give rise to a retaliatory animus, we AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal of the complaint as frivolous. See Sojourner T v. Edwards , 974 F.2d 27, 30 (5th Cir. 1992)(court may affirm judgment on any basis supported by the record).
AFFIRMED.