alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 25, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 75344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26110]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Human Genome Research Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Inherited Disease Research Access 
Committee.
    Date: January 8, 2021.
    Time: 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Human Genome Research Institute, National 
Institutes of Health, 6700 B Rockledge Drive, Room 3185, Bethesda, 
MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Barbara J. Thomas, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Human Genome Research 
Institute, National Institutes of Health, 6700 B Rockledge Drive, 
Room 3185, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-8837, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2c4e4d5e4e4d5e4d02584443414d5f6c424544024b435a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1b797a69797a697a356f7374767a685b757273357c746d">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.172, Human 
Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: November 19, 2020.
Patricia B. Hansberger,
Supervisory Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee 
Policy.
[FR Doc. 2020-26110 Filed 11-24-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
### §§616nn to 616rr. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 616nn, Pub. L. 88–583, §1, Sept. 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 925, authorized construction, operation, and maintenance of Lower Teton Division of Teton Basin project.

Section 616oo, Pub. L. 88–583, §2, Sept. 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 925, related to extension of period of repayment of construction costs.

Section 616pp, Pub. L. 88–583, §3, Sept. 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 925, authorized construction, operation, and maintenance of public recreation facilities in connection with this project.

Section 616qq, Pub. L. 88–583, §4, Sept. 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 926; Pub. L. 96–470, §108(d), Oct. 19, 1980, 94 Stat. 2239, related to water users contracts and conditions to be met prior to construction of facilities.

Section 616rr, Pub. L. 88–583, §5, Sept. 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 926, authorized appropriations for this division.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1735

NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING AND DRY DOCK COMPANY, Petitioner, versusVON PATRICK; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (99-789, 00-291) Submitted: December 29, 2000 Decided: January 18, 2001Before LUTTIG and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Jonathan H. Walker, MASON, COWARDIN & MASON, Newport News, Virginia, for Petitioner. Gregory Edward Camden, MONTAGNA, KLEIN & CAMDEN, L.L.P., Norfolk, Virginia, for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company seeks review ofthe Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the Administrative Law Judge’s and District Director’s orders awarding attorney’s fees to claimant’s counsel pursuant to the Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-950 (West 1986 & Supp. 2000). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Co. v. Von Patrick , Nos. 99-789, 00-291 (BRB Apr. 14, 2000). 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
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7796

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ROBERT JAMES MURPHY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, District Judge. (CR-93-68, CA-97-397-2)

Submitted: April 15, 1998 Decided: April 19, 1999

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert James Murphy, Appellant Pro Se. Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Robert James Murphy seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994

& Supp. 1998) and his motion for reconsideration of that order. We

have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting

the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See

United States v. Murphy, Nos. CR-93-68; CA-97-397-2 (M.D.N.C. Sept.

15, 1998; Oct. 19, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
#### Simon Holmes, appellee, v. Charles E. Frazier et al., Civil Service Commissioners et al., appellants.

Gen. No. 28,233.

Order quashing record of the proceedings of the Chicago Civil Service Commission as shown by its writ of *certiorari*sued out by appellee, who was ordered removed from position as sergeant of police. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. Thomas G. Windes, Judge, presiding. Heard in the second division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1922.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed May 31, 1923.

Rehearing denied June 11, 1923.

Samuel A. Ettelson, Corporation Counsel, for appellants; Gilbert G. Ogden, Assistant Corporation Counsel, of counsel. Michael F. Ryan, for appellee.

Mr. Presiding Justice Barnes

delivered the opinion of the court.
§ 248.420 Definitions. *Community-based nonprofit housing developer* means a nonprofit community development corporation that: ( 1 ) Has been classified by the Internal Revenue Service as an exempt organization under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
( 2 ) Has been in existence for at least two years prior to the date of the grant application;
( 3 ) Has a record of service to low and moderate income people in the community in which the project is located;
( 4 ) Is organized at the neighborhood, city, county, or multi-county level; and
( 5 ) In the case of a corporation acquiring eligible low income housing under subpart B of this part, agrees to form a purchaser entity that conforms to the definition of a community-based nonprofit organization under such subpart and agrees to use its best efforts to secure majority tenant consent to the acquisition of the project for which grant assistance is requested.
*Eligible intermediaries.* For purposes of this subpart, the term “eligible intermediary” means a State, regional, or national nonprofit organization (including a quasi-public organization) or a State or local housing agency that: ( 1 ) Has as a central purpose the preservation of existing affordable housing and the prevention of displacement;
( 2 ) Does not receive direct Federal appropriations for operating support;
( 3 ) In the case of a national nonprofit organization, has been in existence for at least five years prior to the date of application and has been classified by the Internal Revenue Service as an exempt organization under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
( 4 ) In the case of a regional or State nonprofit organization, has been in existence for at least three years prior to the date of application and has been classified by the Internal Revenue Service as an exempt organization under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or is otherwise a tax-exempt entity;
( 5 ) Has a record of service to low income individuals or community-based nonprofit housing development in multiple communities and, with respect to intermediaries administering assistance under § 248.405, has experience with the allocation or administration of grant or loan funds; and
( 6 ) Meets standards of fiscal responsibility established by the Commissioner.
#### Orion A. Woodson and Sarah M. Carver, appellees, v. Wabash Railway Company, appellant.

Action for injury to crops due to an overflow caused by defendant’s negligence. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit *625Court of Scott county; the Hon. E. S. Smith, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the April term, 1922.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed October 25, 1922.

Bellatti, Bellatti & Moriarty, for appellant; N. S. Brown and L. H. Strasser, of counsel. Funk & McKeene, for appellees.

Mr. Presiding Justice Niehaus

delivered the opinion of the court.
-1- 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

COURT OF APPEALS 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, 

UNPUBLISHED 

March 21, 2017 

v No. 328001 

Livingston Circuit Court 

MARTIN EDWARD ZALE, LC No. 14-022392-FC 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

Before: BECKERING, P.J., and O’CONNELL and BORRELLO, JJ. 

BECKERING, P.J. (concurring). 

 I concur in result only. 

/s/ Jane M. Beckering
### §§166 to 175. Repealed. Pub. L. 94–579, title VII, §702, Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2787

Section 166, acts May 14, 1880, ch. 89, §3, 21 Stat. 141; June 6, 1900, ch. 821, 31 Stat. 683; Aug. 9, 1912, ch. 280, 37 Stat. 267, related to time for settlers to file application and for perfection of entry, marriage of entrywoman, and preferential right of entry.

Section 167, acts Apr. 6, 1914, ch. 51, 38 Stat. 312; Mar. 1, 1921, ch. 90, 41 Stat. 1193, related to marriage of entryman to entrywoman.

Section 168, act Oct. 17, 1914, ch. 325, 38 Stat. 740, related to marriage of entrywoman to alien.

Section 169, R.S. §2297; Mar. 3, 1881, ch. 153, 21 Stat. 511; June 6, 1912, ch. 153, 37 Stat. 124; 1946 Reorg. Plan No. 3, §403, eff. July 16, 1946, 11 F.R. 7876, 60 Stat. 1100, related to failure to establish residence and reversion of entered lands to Federal Government.

Section 170, act Oct. 22, 1914, ch. 335, 38 Stat. 766, related to rights of wife on abandonment by husband.

Section 171, R.S. §2292, related to rights inuring to infant children on death of both mother and father.

Section 172, act June 8, 1880, ch. 136, 21 Stat. 166; 1946 Reorg. Plan No. 3, §403, eff. July 16, 1946, 11 F.R. 7876, 60 Stat. 1100, related to effect of insanity of settlers upon claims.

Section 173, R.S. §2301; Mar. 3, 1891, ch. 561, §6, 26 Stat. 1098; June 3, 1896, ch. 312, §2, 29 Stat. 197, related to commutations of entries after 14 months from date of settlement.

Section 174, R.S. §2288; Mar. 3, 1891, ch. 561, §§3, 4, 26 Stat. 1097; Mar. 3, 1905, ch. 1424, 33 Stat. 991, related to right to transfer claims.

Section 175, R.S. §2296; Apr. 28, 1922, ch. 155, 42 Stat. 502, related to exemption from execution of homestead land.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Pub. L. 94–579, title VII, §702, Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2787, provided that the repeal made by section 702 is effective on and after Oct. 21, 1976, except such effective date to be on and after tenth anniversary of date of approval of this Act, Oct. 21, 1976, insofar as homestead laws apply to public lands in Alaska.

#### Savings Provision

Repeal by Pub. L. 94–579 not to be construed as terminating any valid lease, permit, patent, etc., existing on Oct. 21, 1976, see section 701 of Pub. L. 94–579, set out as a note under section 1701 of this title.
#### In re HITCHINS’ ESTATE. Appeal of COMPTROLLER OF NEW YORK.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

January 4, 1905.)

In the matter of the estate of John Hitchins, deceased. In the matter of the appeal of the Comptroller of the state of New York from order determining collateral inheritance tax. No opinion. Decree (89 N. Y. Supp. 472) unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Emergent Group Inc. (the “registrant”)
on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “report”), I, Bruce J. Haber,
Chief Executive Officer of the registrant, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





(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.




May 14,
2008


/s/
      Bruce J. HaberBruce
      J. HaberChief
      Executive Officer
### §9705. Federal Nuclear Operations Corps' study

#### (a) Cooperation and coordination requirements; purpose

The Secretary, in cooperation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, shall initiate a study as to the sufficiency of efforts in the United States to provide specially trained professionals to operate the controls of nuclear powerplants and other facilities in the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle. In carrying out the study, the Secretary shall coordinate his activities with the ongoing programs of the utility industry and other Federal governmental agencies for obtaining high standards of operator performance.

#### (b) Assessments

(1) In conducting the study the Secretary shall assess the desirability and feasibility of creating a Federal Corps of such professionals to inspect and supervise such operations.

(2) The assessment shall consider the establishment of an academy to train Corps professionals in all aspects of nuclear technology, nuclear operations, nuclear regulatory and related law, and health science.

(3) The assessment shall include the appropriate organizational approach for the establishment of a Federal Corps within the executive branch.

#### (c) Report to Congress

The Secretary shall complete the study within one year after December 22, 1980, and shall submit a report along with his recommendations to the Congress.

(Pub. L. 96–567, §6, Dec. 22, 1980, 94 Stat. 3332.)

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of certain functions from Nuclear Regulatory Commission to Chairman thereof, see Reorg. Plan No. 1 of 1980, 45 F.R. 40561, 94 Stat. 3585, set out as a note under section 5841 of this title.
#### E. I. Clara Hoffman, appellee, v. W. N. Macqueen & Company, appellant.

Gen. No. 28,193.

Claim for fraudulently substituting shares of defendant’s stock for certain bonds purchased. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. William N. Gemmill, Judge, presiding. Heard in the first division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1922.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed June 25, 1923.

Rehearing denied July 6, 1923.

J. S. Dudley, for appellant. Mather & Hutson, for appellee; Lawrence C. Traeger, of counsel.

Mr. Justice Johnston

delivered the opinion of the court.
### Rectified images of selected geologic maps in the Northern Rockies Area, Idaho, Montana, Washington, and Wyoming

By: Jeremy C. LarsenKenneth C. AssmusJ. Douglas CauseyMichael L. Zientek**

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/ds106

#### Links

- More information:  **USGS Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Charles Nettles, Appellant, v. Police Commissioner of the City of New York et al., Respondents.

In a habeas corpus proceeding instituted by relator to test the legality of his arrest under a warrant of extradition issued by the Acting Governor of this State in compliance with a requisition from the Governor of South Carolina, relator appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 7, 1960, dismissing the writ of habeas corpus and remanding the relator to the custody of South Carolina’s representative. The requisition is supported by the affidavit of the complainant in South Carolina. Order reversed-on the law and the facts, writ sustained and relator discharged from custody. Findings of fact inconsistent herewith are reversed, and new findings are made as indicated herein. An extradiction proceeding based upon an affidavit requires closer scrutiny than one founded upon an indictment; and the affidavit should plainly and distinctly charge the alleged offense. *(People ex rel. Lawrence*v. *Brady,*56 N. Y. 182, 190-191; *People ex rel. de Martini*v. *McLaughlin,*243 N. Y. 417, 419; *People ex rel. Hodges*V. *Silberglitt,*11 A D 2d 681.) In our opinion, the affidavit of the complainant here fails to establish the commission of the crime sought to be charged, namely: obtaining money by false pretense. It is not stated that the acts of appellant were done with intent to cheat and defraud, which is a basic element of the crime alleged. *(People*v. *Hicks,*77 S. C. 289; Code of Laws of South Carolina, § 16>-366; ef. *People ex rel. de Martini*v. *McLaughlin, supra', People ex rel. Hodges*v. *Silberglitt, supra.)*Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
#### Louis Beltzer, Plaintiff, v. City of Long Beach, Respondent, and Abraham Bergman et al., Appellants.

Motion by appellants to compel the defendant-respondent to accept service of the notice of appeal granted. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Kleinfeld, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Marvin Crawford, Appellant.

Motion for assignment of counsel. Motion denied,
69–008 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 110–493 

WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII 

WITH RESPECT TO CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED FROM THE COMMITTEE ON RULES 

DECEMBER 13, 2007.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

Mr. MCGOVERN, from the Committee on Rules, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H. Res. 873] 

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House 

Resolution 873, by a non-record vote, report the same to the House 

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. 

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a twothirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from 

the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions reported from the 

Rules Committee. The rule applies the waiver to any resolution reported on the legislative day of December 17, 2007, providing for 

consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 2764) 

making appropriations for the Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 

30, 2008, and for other purposes. It also applies to any resolution 

reported on the legislative day of December 17, 2007, providing for 

consideration of the Senate amendments to H.R. 6, to reduce our 

Nation’s dependency on foreign oil by investing in clean, renewable, 

and alternative energy resources, promoting new emerging energy 

technologies, developing greater efficiency, and creating a Strategic 

Energy Efficiency and Renewables Reserve to invest in alternative 

energy, and for other purposes. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING
### §7270a. Guards for Strategic Petroleum Reserve facilities

Under guidelines prescribed by the Secretary and concurred with by the Attorney General, employees of the Department of Energy and employees of contractors and subcontractors (at any tier) of the Department of Energy, while discharging their official duties of protecting the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (established under part B of title I of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act [42 U.S.C. 6231 et seq.]) or its storage or related facilities or of protecting persons upon the Strategic Petroleum Reserve or its storage or related facilities, may—

(1) carry firearms, if designated by the Secretary and qualified for the use of firearms under the guidelines; and

(2) arrest without warrant any person for an offense against the United States—

(A) in the case of a felony, if the employee has reasonable grounds to believe that the person—

(i) has committed or is committing a felony; and

(ii) is in or is fleeing from the immediate area of the felony; and

(B) in the case of a felony or misdemeanor, if the violation is committed in the presence of the employee.

(Pub. L. 95–91, title VI, §661, as added Pub. L. 100–531, §1(a), Oct. 25, 1988, 102 Stat. 2652.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 94–163, Dec. 22, 1975, 89 Stat. 871. Part B of title I of the Act is classified generally to part B (§6231 et seq.) of subchapter I of chapter 77 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 6201 of this title and Tables.