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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 318 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 318

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and 
 feasibility of designating Castle Nugent Farms located on St. Croix, 
 Virgin Islands, as a unit of the National Park System, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 25, 2005

 Mrs. Christensen introduced the following bill; which was referred to 
                       the Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and 
 feasibility of designating Castle Nugent Farms located on St. Croix, 
 Virgin Islands, as a unit of the National Park System, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE STUDY REGARDING CASTLE NUGENT FARMS.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
            (1) Castle Nugent Farms, located on the southeastern shore 
        of St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, is the largest parcel of 
        privately-held land in the Virgin Islands and has been an 
        operating cattle ranch for 50 years.
            (2) This land has the largest and healthiest fringing coral 
        reef anywhere in the Virgin Islands.
            (3) It consists of Caribbean dry forest and pasturelands 
        with considerable cultural resources including both pre-
        Columbian and post-European settlement.
            (4) Castle Nugent Farms contains a large historic 17th 
        century Danish estate house that sits on over 4 miles of 
        pristine Caribbean oceanfront property.
            (5) In addition to being an area for turtle nesting and 
        night heron nesting, it is the home for the Senepol cattle 
        breed, a unique breed of cattle that was developed on St. Croix 
        in the early 1900's to adapt to the island's climate.
    (b) Study.--The Secretary of the Interior shall carry out a study 
regarding the suitability and feasibility of designating Castle Nugent 
Farms as a unit of the National Park System.
    (c) Study Process and Completion.--Section 8(c) of Public Law 91-
383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-5(c)) shall apply to the conduct and completion of 
the study required by this section.
                                 <all>
```
### §115. Vessel

In this title, the term "vessel" has the meaning given that term in section 3 of title 1.

(Pub. L. 109–304, §4, Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1487.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 115 | 46:2101(45). | |

Section
**Exhibit
      23.1**





Consent
      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement on
      Form
      S-8 of MISCOR Group, Ltd. and Subsidiaries of our report dated March 29, 2007,
      with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of MISCOR Group, Ltd. and
      Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated
      statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the
      years in the three year period ended December 31, 2006, which appears in the
      December 31, 2006 annual report on form 10-K of MISCOR Group, Ltd. and
      Subsidiaries.













ASHER
      & COMPANY, Ltd.





**Philadelphia,
      Pennsylvania**


**March
      29, 2007**
### §485b. Amendment of existing repayment contracts

In connection with any repayment contract or other form of obligation, existing on August 4, 1939, to pay construction charges, providing for repayment on the basis of a definite period, the Secretary is authorized, upon request by the water users involved or their duly authorized representatives for amendment under this section of said contract or other form of obligation, and if in the Secretary's judgement such amendment is both practicable and in keeping with the general purpose of this subchapter, to amend said contract or other form of obligation so as to provide that the construction charges remaining unaccrued on the date of the amendment, or any later date agreed upon, shall be spread in definite annual installments on the basis of a longer definite period fixed in each case by the Secretary: Provided, That for any construction charges said longer period shall not exceed forty years, exclusive of 1931 and subsequent years to the extent of moratoria or deferments of construction charges due and payable for such years effected pursuant to Acts of Congress, from the date when the first installment of said construction charges become due and payable under the original obligation to pay said construction charges and in no event shall the unexpired part of said longer period exceed double the number of remaining years, as of the date of the amendment made pursuant to this subchapter, in which installments of said construction charges would become due and payable under said existing repayment contract or other form of obligation to pay construction charges.

(Aug. 4, 1939, ch. 418, §3, 53 Stat. 1188.)

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

#### Extension of Date of Modification of Repayment Contracts

Act Mar. 6, 1952, ch. 94, 66 Stat. 16, as amended by acts Aug. 31, 1954, ch. 1168, 68 Stat. 1044; Pub. L. 85–156, Aug. 21, 1957, 71 Stat. 390; Pub. L. 85–611, §3, Aug. 8, 1958, 72 Stat. 543; Pub. L. 86–308, §2, Sept. 21, 1959, 73 Stat. 585, provided that the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior by sections 485b and 485f of this title should be extended through Dec. 31, 1960.
§ 92.60 Allocation amounts for insular areas. ( a ) *Initial allocation amount for each insular area.* The initial allocation amount for each insular area is determined based upon the insular area's population and occupied rental units compared to all insular areas.
( b ) *Threshold requirements.* The HUD Field Office shall review each insular area's progress on outstanding allocations made under this section, based on the insular area's performance report, the timeliness of close-outs, and compliance with fund management requirements and regulations, taking into consideration the size of the allocation and the degree and complexity of the program. If HUD determines from this review that the insular area does not have the capacity to administer effectively a new allocation, or a portion of a new allocation, in addition to allocations currently under administration, HUD may reduce the insular area's initial allocation amount.
( c ) *Previous audit findings and outstanding monetary obligations.* HUD shall not make an allocation to an insular area that has either an outstanding audit finding for any HUD program, or an outstanding monetary obligation to HUD that is in arrears, or for which a repayment schedule has not been established. This restriction does not apply if the HUD Field Office finds that the insular area has made a good faith effort to clear the audit and, when there is an outstanding monetary obligation to HUD, the insular area has made a satisfactory arrangement for repayment of the funds due HUD and payments are current.
( d ) *Increases to the initial allocation amount.* If funds reserved for the insular areas are available because HUD has decreased the amount for one or more insular areas in accordance with paragraphs (b) or (c) of this section, or for any other reason, HUD may increase the allocation amount for one or more of the remaining insular areas based upon the insular area's performance in committing HOME funds within the 24 month deadline, producing housing units described in its program description, and meeting HOME program requirements. Funds that become available but which are not used to increase the allocation amount for one or more of the remaining insular areas will be reallocated in accordance with § 92.66.
( e ) *Notice of allocation amounts.* HUD will notify each insular area, in writing, as to the amount of its HOME allocation.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CAI YIN HE,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-71897

Agency No. A099-666-093

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted May 15, 2012** 

Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Cai Yin He, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board

of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s

decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief

under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8

FILED

MAY 22 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-71897

U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence factual findings, Zehatye v.

Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition for

review.

Even if He’s testimony was credible, substantial evidence supports the

agency’s finding that he did not suffer past persecution where he was not

physically harmed and was detained for short periods of time. See Gu v. Gonzales,

454 F.3d 1014, 1019-21 (9th Cir. 2006). Substantial evidence also supports the

agency’s finding that He does not have a well-founded fear of future persecution. 

See Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Li v. INS, 92

F.3d 985, 988 (9th Cir. 1996) (no persecution where the petitioner would face the

same punishment as any other returning migrant). 

Because He failed to meet the lower burden of proof for asylum, it follows

that he has not met the higher standard for withholding of removal. See Zehatye,

453 F.3d at 1190.

Finally, substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief

because He failed to establish that it is more likely than not he will be tortured by

or with the acquiescence of the government of China. See Silaya v. Mukasey, 524

F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
#### § 3800.30 Subpoena enforcement in district court.

In the case of contumacy of a witness or a witness's refusal to obey a subpoena or order of the Secretary, the United States district court for the jurisdiction in which an investigation is carried on may issue an order requiring compliance with the subpoena. HUD headquarters in Washington, DC, is one of the locations in which the Secretary carries on investigations of its consumer regulatory programs.
### §§616k to 616s. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 616k, Pub. L. 87–594, §1, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 395, authorized construction, operation, and maintenance of Arbuckle project, Oklahoma.

Section 616l, Pub. L. 87–594, §2, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 395, related to allocation of costs of construction, operation, and maintenance of this project.

Section 616m, Pub. L. 87–594, §3, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 396, related to contracts with water users' organization.

Section 616n, Pub. L. 87–594, §4, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 396, related to transfer of care, operation, and maintenance of this project to water users' organization.

Section 616o, Pub. L. 87–594, §5, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 397, related to construction of this project in stages or units.

Section 616p, Pub. L. 87–594, §6, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 397, related to construction, operation, and maintenance of recreational facilities in connection with this project.

Section 616q, Pub. L. 87–594, §7, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 397, related to conservation and development of fish and wildlife in connection with this project.

Section 616r, Pub. L. 87–594, §8, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 397, related to expenditures for the reservoir and aqueduct system.

Section 616s, Pub. L. 87–594, §9, Aug. 24, 1962, 76 Stat. 397, authorized appropriations for this project.
§ 791.102 Definitions. *Act.* The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.D. 1437), as amended.
*Allocation area.* A municipality, county, or group of municipalities or counties identified by the HUD field office for the purpose of allocating housing assistance.
*Assistant Secretary.* The Assistant Secretary for Housing or the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, as appropriate to the housing assistance under consideration.
*Budget authority.* The maximum amount authorized by the Congress for payments over the term of assistance contracts.
*Fiscal year.* The official operating period of the Federal government, beginning on October 1 and ending on September 30.
*Metropolitan area.* See MSA.
*MSA.* A metropolitan statistical area established by the Office of Management and Budget. The term also includes primary metropolitan statistical areas (PMSAs), which are the component parts of larger urbanized areas designated as consolidated metropolitan statistical areas (CMSAs). Where an MSA is divided among two or more field offices, references to an MSA mean the portion of the MSA within the State/Area Office jurisdiction.
*Public housing agency (PHA).* ( 1 ) Any State, county, municipality, or other governmental entity or public body which is authorized to administer a program under the 1937 Act (or an agency or instrumentality of such an entity).
( 2 ) In addition, for purposes of the program of Section 8 tenant-based assistance under part 982 of this title, the term PHA also includes any of the following: ( i ) A consortia of housing agencies, each of which meets the qualifications in paragraph (1) of this definition, that HUD determines has the capacity and capability to efficiently administer the program (in which case, HUD may enter into a consolidated ACC with any legal entity authorized to act as the legal representative of the consortia members);
( ii ) Any other public or private non-profit entity that was administering a Section 8 tenant-based assistance program pursuant to a contract with the contract administrator of such program (HUD or a PHA) in effect on October 21, 1998; or
( iii ) For any area outside the jurisdiction of a PHA that is administering a tenant-based program, or where HUD determines that such PHA is not administering the program effectively, a private non-profit entity or a governmental entity or public body that would otherwise lack jurisdiction to administer the program in such area.
[61 FR 10849, Mar. 15, 1996, as amended at 64 FR 26639, May 14, 1999]
NOS MULTIBEAM SURVEYS

DRAW/IN UMBER | DRAW
Sweet B A | ; | | |
ILD CORPORATI IRVINE, CALIFO! PLAN PORATION * IRV
- : +
=
O)
O
2
an
2
«x O
Zz oO
oO
’ © ro}
mo
). —
_ <
WW ij
ld
= 6
nn

cted meters _

_ Contours in corre
# Patent

## Title
Single crystal thin films

## Abstract

None

## Background
## Claims

1. A method of forming a layer of semiconductor material of improved quality, comprising the steps of: {100} crystallographic surface tilted in the <001> direction; and material over said surface to obtain a layer of said semiconductor material.

2. The method as defined by claim 1, wherein said different single crystalline semiconductor material is a III-V semiconductor.

3. The method as defined by claim 1, wherein said epitaxial depositing step is performed by molecular beam epitaxy.

4. The method as defined by claim 2, wherein said epitaxial depositing step is performed by molecular beam epitaxy.

5. A method of forming a layer of gallium arsenide of improved quality, comprising the steps of: crystallographic surface tilted by at least 2.29 degrees in the <001> direction; obtain a layer of gallium arsenide.

6. The method as defined by claim 5, further comprising the steps of epitaxially depositing intervening strained layers of III-V semiconductor material between said arsenic prelayer and said layer of gallium arsenide.

7. The method as defined by claim 5, wherein said epitaxial depositing steps are performed by molecular beam epitaxy.

8. The method as defined by claim 6, wherein said epitaxial depositing steps are performed by molecular beam epitaxy.

9. The method as defined by claim 1, wherein said substrate is silicon, and said different single cyrstalline semiconductor material is gallium arsenide.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsEvaluation of alternatives for trichlorotrifluoroethane (CFC-113) to clean and verify liquid oxygen systemsNASA Langley Research Center (LARC) investigated several alternatives to the use of tri-chloro-tri-fluoroethane(CFC-113) in oxygen cleaning and verification. Alternatives investigated include several replacement solvents, Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) and Total Organic Carbon (TOC) analysis. Among the solvents, 1, 1-dichloro-1-fluoroethane (HCFC 141b) and di-chloro-penta-fluoro-propane (HCFC 225) are the most suitable alternatives for cleaning and verification. However, use of HCFC 141b is restricted, HCFC 225 introduces toxicity hazards, and the NDE and TOC methods of verification are not suitable for processes at LaRC. Therefore, the interim recommendation is to sparingly use CFC-113 for the very difficult cleaning tasks where safety is critical and to use HCFC 225 to clean components in a controlled laboratory environment. Meanwhile, evaluation must continue on now solvents and procedures to find one suited to LaRCs oxygen cleaning needs.Document ID19960050103Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsMorris, Michelle L.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton,VA United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 1996Subject CategoryChemistry And Materials (General)Report/Patent NumberNASA-TM-110275NAS 1.15:110275Accession Number96N34210Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-90-82-01Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19960050103.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
|Exhibit 31.1
     CERTIFICATION                       
|------------------------------------------------------
|I, Hugh Miller, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:
|1.                                                    
|2.                                                    
|3.                                                    
|4.                                                    
|                                                      
|                                                      
|                                                      
|5.                                                    
|                                                      



---

| | (b) | any fraud, whether or not material,
            that involves management or other employees who have a significant
        role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: May 17, 2004

| | /s/ HUGH MILLER                      
| | -------------------------------------
| |                                      
| | Hugh Miller                          
| | President and Chief Executive Officer



---
Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

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

WAYMON MIKIANGELO BERRY,III,

Plaintiff,

    v.

R. METCALFE,

Defendant._______________________________                                

)))))))))) ))

No. C 09-2027 MMC (PR)  

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’SFIRST REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OFTIME

(Docket No. 10)

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, defendant’s request for an extension of time to file a

summary judgment or other dispositive motion is hereby GRANTED.  Defendant shall file

such motion no later than March 31, 2010.  Within thirty days of the date the motion is

filed, plaintiff shall file with the Court and serve on defendant’s counsel opposition thereto. 

Defendant shall file a reply to plaintiff’s opposition within fifteen days of the date such

opposition is filed.

This order terminates Docket No. 10.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: January 5, 2010

_____________________________MAXINE M. CHESNEYUnited States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-02027-MMC   Document 13   Filed 01/05/10   Page 1 of 1

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2018-03-12T20:59:50-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       2,944,303
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,413,495
<ALLOWANCES>                                   265,666
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,905,815
<PP&E>                                       3,959,622
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,771,168
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,569,267
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,078,845
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        198
<COMMON>                                        13,412
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,466,601
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,569,266
<SALES>                                      4,262,503
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,262,503
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               11,069,834
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               986,645
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               233,704
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,498
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,793,977)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,793,977)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.72)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.72)


</TABLE>