alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §3371a. Assessment of foreign intelligence threats to Federal elections

#### (a) Definitions

In this section:

#### (1) Appropriate congressional committees

The term "appropriate congressional committees" means—

(A) the congressional intelligence committees;

(B) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate; and

(C) the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives.

#### (2) Congressional leadership

The term "congressional leadership" includes the following:

(A) The majority leader of the Senate.

(B) The minority leader of the Senate.

(C) The Speaker of the House of Representatives.

(D) The minority leader of the House of Representatives.

#### (3) Security vulnerability

The term "security vulnerability" has the meaning given such term in section 650 of title 6.

#### (b) In general

The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the Director of the National Security Agency, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the heads of other relevant elements of the intelligence community, shall—

(1) commence not later than 1 year before any regularly scheduled Federal election occurring after December 31, 2018, and complete not later than 180 days before such election, an assessment of security vulnerabilities of State election systems; and

(2) not later than 180 days before any regularly scheduled Federal election occurring after December 31, 2018, submit a report on such security vulnerabilities and an assessment of foreign intelligence threats to the election to—

(A) congressional leadership; and

(B) the appropriate congressional committees.

#### (c) Update

Not later than 90 days before any regularly scheduled Federal election occurring after December 31, 2018, the Director of National Intelligence shall—

(1) update the assessment of foreign intelligence threats to that election; and

(2) submit the updated assessment to—

(A) congressional leadership; and

(B) the appropriate congressional committees.

(Pub. L. 116–92, div. E, title LXV, §6503, Dec. 20, 2019, 133 Stat. 2203; Pub. L. 117–263, div. G, title LXXI, §7143(d)(7), Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3664.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2022—Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 117–263 substituted "section 650 of title 6" for "section 1501 of title 6".

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

#### Definitions

For definitions of "congressional intelligence committees" and "intelligence community", referred to in text, see section 5003 of div. E of Pub. L. 116–92, set out as a note under section 3003 of this title.
Gormas. Michael (OSn 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Katrina Hoffman <khoffman@pwssc.org> 

Thursday, November 13, 2014 9:00 PM 

EAS (OST) 

tim.thompson@alaskaair.com 

EAS application for Alaska Airlines ; 

Mr. Kevin Schlemmer, Chief, EAS Division 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

Docket OST-1998-4899 

Dear Mr. Schlemmer, 

. ,·.-· 

As a business leader in Cordova, I write you today to urge you to ensure that Essential Air Service continues to be 

provided to rural Alaska. I run a research and education institution with a multimillion dollar annual budget, as well as a 

funding agency that focuses on improving oil spill response technology and understanding impacts of oil spills on 

ecosystems. To lose essential air service would cripple my non-profit institution and the economy of the community where 

we are situated. 

While we are only about 160 air miles from Anchorage, the transit to Anchorage by ferry, tunnel, and highway takes 

approximately 11 hours in the winter. By comparison, the Alaska Airlines jet service trip is approximately 35 minutes in 

duration. Access to our community by Alaska Airlines allows us to send and receive critical research equipment between 

Alaska and the lower 48; support transportation for numerous seasonal staff; and support the year-round economy of our 

community by being one of the largest winter time employers in Cordova. 

The absence of reliable jet air service would harm Alaska's economy, likely causing dysfunction or dismantling of many 

businesses. The research we conduct at PWSSC is regional in nature but of both local and global relevance. Please 

make sure that Cordova continues to be connected to Anchorage, Juneau, and beyond with Essential Air Service. Despite 

it's size, our town is one of the most lucrative fishing ports in the United States and to rob us of our connection to other 

destinations would be a disservice to the citizens of the United States. 

Best regards, 

Katrina Hoffman 

President and CEO, Prince William Sound Science Center 

Executive Director, Oil Spill Recovery Institute 

khoffman@pwssc. erg 

www.pwssc.org 

907-424-5800 x225 (office) 

206-947-7990 (mobile) 

1
**Exhibit      21.1**

**List      of Subsidiaries**

| **Name**                                                                                               |   | **Percentage                Owned**   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
| DonTech                Waste Services Inc.                                                             |   | 100%                                  |
| Dalian                Dongtai Industrial Waste Treatment Co., Ltd.                                |   | 90%                (owned by DonTech) |
| Dongtai                Water Recycling Co., Ltd.                                                       |   | 80%                (owned by DonTech) |
| Dalian                Zhuorui Resource Recycling Co., Ltd.                                             |   | 70%                (owned by DonTech) |
| Dalian                Lipp Environmental Energy Engineering & Technology, Co.,                Ltd. |   | 75%                (owned by DonTech) |

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's consolidated balance sheet and consolidated statement of operations
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such consolidated financial
statements together with the related footnotes thereto.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          72,418
<SECURITIES>                                    31,423
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,850
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     69,307
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               200,014
<PP&E>                                         178,782
<DEPRECIATION>                                  76,753
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 742,747
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           68,626
<BONDS>                                        776,027
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (112,035)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   742,747
<SALES>                                        264,584
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               264,584
<CGS>                                          148,522
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  148,522
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                44,029
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              78,045
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,930
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (680)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,610
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,610
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
### §5120. International uniformity of standards and requirements

(a) Participation in International Forums.—Subject to guidance and direction from the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Transportation shall participate in international forums that establish or recommend mandatory standards and requirements for transporting hazardous material in international commerce.

(b) Consultation.—The Secretary may consult with interested authorities to ensure that, to the extent practicable, regulations the Secretary prescribes under sections 5103(b), 5104, 5110, and 5112 of this title are consistent with standards and requirements related to transporting hazardous material that international authorities adopt.

(c) Differences With International Standards and Requirements.—This section—

(1) does not require the Secretary to prescribe a standard or requirement identical to a standard or requirement adopted by an international authority if the Secretary decides the standard or requirement is unnecessary or unsafe; and

(2) does not prohibit the Secretary from prescribing a safety standard or requirement more stringent than a standard or requirement adopted by an international authority if the Secretary decides the standard or requirement is necessary in the public interest.

(Pub. L. 103–272, §1(d), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 778; Pub. L. 109–59, title VII, §§7117, 7126, Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1902, 1909.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 5120(a) | 49 App.:1804(d)(1). | Jan. 3, 1975, Pub. L. 93–633, §105(d), 88 Stat. 2157; restated Nov. 16, 1990, Pub. L. 101–615 §4, 104 Stat. 3252. |
| 5120(b) | 49 App.:1804(d)(2) (1st sentence). | |
| 5120(c) | 49 App.:1804(d)(2) (last sentence). | |

Section

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2005—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 109–59, §7126, substituted "Secretary may" for "Secretary of Transportation may".

Pub. L. 109–59, §7117(a), inserted "and requirements" after "standards".

Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 109–59, §7126, substituted "Secretary to prescribe" for "Secretary of Transportation to prescribe".

Pub. L. 109–59, §7117(b)(1), inserted "or requirement" after "standard" wherever appearing.

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 109–59, §7117(b)(2), struck out "included in a standard" before "adopted" and inserted "standard or" before "requirement" wherever appearing.
#### GWINN et al. v. WASHINGTON POST CO.

No. 11923.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued Feb. 9, 1954.

Decided Feb. 18, 1954.

Mr. Stanley E. Otto, Washington, D. C. , for appellants.

Mr. Gerhard A. Gesell, Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs. Fontaine C. Bradley and Abram J. Chayes, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellee.

Before EDGERTON, PRETTYMAN and FAHY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit for libel. The District Court granted summary judgment for the defendant newspaper. It appears that on a certain day police officers and federal agents set out to execute some thirty-six warrants of arrest. Five persons sought under the warrants were found upon the premises of a restaurant and nightclub owned by the appellants, and the arrests were made there. The arrested persons were taken promptly to the United States Commissioner and held by him under bonds. The Washington Post carried a factual news story of the events. The story, fairly read, contains nothing defamatory of the appellants or of their business. There is evidence in the record that appellants cooperated in the law enforcement move. The judgment of the District Court is

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7120

DONALD J. TYNER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

FRANK C. SIZER, JR., Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL

FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-00-

1426-L)

Submitted: December 19, 2002 Decided: December 31, 2002

Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Donald J. Tyner, Appellant Pro Se. John Joseph Curran, Jr.,

Attorney General, Mary Ann Rapp Ince, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Donald J. Tyner seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).

An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus

proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate

of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of

appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district

court on the merits absent “a substantial showing of the denial of

a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000); see Rose

v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 122 S. Ct. 318

(2001). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons

stated by the district court that Tyner has not made the requisite

showing. See Tyner v. Sizer, No. CA-00-1426-L (D. Md. June 28,

2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and

dismiss the appeal. 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
### Part B—Closure of Facilities
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 968 

To require the Secretary of Defense to notify Congress of certain foreign 

airborne objects located in the national airspace system that are capable 

of carrying out surveillance activities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2023 

Mr. TORRES of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Defense to notify Congress of 

certain foreign airborne objects located in the national 

airspace system that are capable of carrying out surveillance activities. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Aerial Intelligence-col5 lection Revelation Act of 2023’’ or the ‘‘AIR Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 968 IH

1 SEC. 2. NOTIFICATION OF FOREIGN SURVEILLANCE OB2 JECTS. 

3 (a) NOTIFICATION TO CONGRESS.—The Secretary of 

4 Defense shall submit to Congress a written notification if 

5 any foreign surveillance object that enters the national air6 space system without prior approval not later than 24 

7 hours after such object enters such system. 

8 (b) DEFINITION OF FOREIGN SURVEILLANCE OB9 JECT.—The term ‘‘foreign surveillance object’’ means any 

10 airborne object, including a balloon or unmanned aircraft, 

11 that— 

12 (1) originated outside of the United States; 

13 (2) is not a scheduled passenger or cargo air14 craft or any other airborne object with prior ap15 proval to enter the national airspace system; and 

16 (3) is capable of carrying out surveillance ac17 tivities. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
### §4330. Notice of claim; institution of suits; computation of time

No return may be made pursuant to section 4309 or 4329 of this title unless notice of claim has been filed: (a) in the case of any property or interest acquired by the United States prior to December 18, 1941, by August 9, 1948; or (b) in the case of any property or interest acquired by the United States on or after December 18, 1941, not later than one year from February 9, 1954, or two years from the vesting of the property or interest in respect of which the claim is made, whichever is later. No suit pursuant to section 4309 of this title may be instituted after April 30, 1949, or after the expiration of two years from the date of the seizure by or vesting in the Alien Property Custodian, as the case may be, of the property or interest in respect of which relief is sought, whichever is later, but in computing such two years there shall be excluded any period during which there was pending a suit or claim for return pursuant to section 4309 or 4329(a) of this title.

(Oct. 6, 1917, ch. 106, §33, as added Dec. 18, 1941, ch. 593, title III, §305, as added Aug. 8, 1946, ch. 878, §1, 60 Stat. 925; amended Aug. 5, 1947, ch. 499, §3, 61 Stat. 786; July 1, 1948, ch. 794, 62 Stat. 1218; Feb. 9, 1954, ch. 4, 68 Stat. 7; Aug. 23, 1954, ch. 830, §2, 68 Stat. 768; Pub. L. 87–846, title II, §204(b), Oct. 22, 1962, 76 Stat. 1115.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 33 of the former Appendix to this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

Prior to classification as section 33, section was formerly classified to section 620 of the former Appendix to this title.

#### Amendments

1962—Pub. L. 87–846 struck out before period at end of first sentence "; except that return may be made to successor organizations designated pursuant to section 4329(h) of this title if notice of claim is filed before the expiration of one year from the effective date of this Act".

1954—Act Aug. 23, 1954, inserted before period at end of first sentence "; except that return may be made to successor organizations designated pursuant to section 4329(h) of this title if notice of claim is filed before the expiration of one year from the effective date of this Act".

Act Feb. 9, 1954, substituted "not later than one year from February 9, 1954" for "by April 30, 1949" in first sentence.

1948—Act July 1, 1948, amended section generally, extending time for filing claims under section 4309 or 4329 of this title.

1947—Act Aug. 5, 1947, provided that notice of certain claims could be filed by Aug. 8, 1948, or that Italian notice of claim could be filed by July 31, 1949.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

Functions vested by law in Alien Property Custodian and Office of Alien Property Custodian transferred to Attorney General by Reorg. Plan No. 1 of 1947, §101, eff. July 1, 1947, 12 F.R. 4534, 61 Stat. 951, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T B AL DE V S I NG H, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 07- 71072 A ge nc yN o. A 076- 841- 573 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d N ove m be r13, 2012 ** B e f o r e : C A N B Y , T R O T T , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . B al dev S i ng h, a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f I nd i a, pet i t i on s f or re vi ew of the B oard of I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ’ ( “ B I A ” ) or de rde ny i ng hi s m ot i on t o r e ope n. O ur j ur i s di c t i on i s gove rne d by8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w f orabus e of

di s c r e t i on the d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n , an dr e v ie w d e n o v o du e p r o c e s s c la im s . Moh am m ed 

# FI LED NO V 19 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS07- 71072 2 v . G o n z a les , 4 0 0 F .3 d7 8 5 , 7 9 1 - 9 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . W e d e n yin p art an dd is m is s in p art th e p e titio n f

o rr e v ie w . T he B IA di d n otabuse i t s di sc re t i on i n d enyi ng S i ng h’ s m ot i on t o reopen be c aus e he f

a i l e d t o s how tha the w a s pr e j udi c e d bythe a l l e ge d i ne f f e c t i ve a s s is tan c e o f

h is f o rm e rc o u n s e l. Se e id. a t793- 94 ( pr e j udi c e r e s ul t s w he n “ the pe r f orm anc e of

c ouns e l w a s s o i na de qua t e tha ti tm ayha ve a f f e c t e d the out c om e of th e p r o c e e d in g s ” ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m ark s o m itte d ) ) . T o th e ex t en tS i n g h n o w co n t en d s th ath i s fo rm er att o rn ey w as al so i neff ec t i ve for f

ai l i ng t o i nform hi m of the need t o i m m edi at el y c om pl et e aF orm I130 pe t i t i on, w e l a c k j ur i s di c t i on t o c ons i de rthi s c ont e nt i on be c aus e S i ngh di d not r a is e it b e f

o r e th e B I A . See B a rr o n v . A s h c r o ft , 358 F . 3d 674, 678 ( 9th C i r . 2004) (th i s co u rtl ack s j u ri sd i ct i o n t o rev i ew co n t en t i o n s n o trai sedb efo re th e ag en cy) . P E T IT IO N F O R R E V IE W D E N IE D i n p art; D IS M IS S E D i n p art.
No. 45,373

#### Virginia C. Coffman, Administratrix of the Estate of Richard M. Coffman, Deceased, Appellant, v. Board of County Commissioners of Osage County, Kansas, Appellee; (John F. Fisher, and Contractors, Inc., a corporation, *Defendants).*

(455 P. 2d 496)

Opinion filed June 14, 1969.

*Stephen Jones,*of Lyndon, argued the cause and was on the brief for the appellant.

*Adrian M. Farver,*county attorney, argued the cause and was on the brief for the appellee.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Harman, C.:

This is an action by the administratrix of the estate of Richard M. Coffman, deceased, to recover damages to an automobile, and for pain and suffering undergone by the decedent prior to his death, all growing out of an automobile collision upon a county highway. Liability against the appellee board of county commissioners is predicated upon an alleged defect in the highway.

The determinative issue here is identical to that in the companion case of *Coffman v. Fisher,*203 Kan. 618, 455 P. 2d 490, this latter action being one by the heirs at law for damages for the alleged wrongful death of Richard M. Coffman as a result of the collision. Under authority of the companion case the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

APPROVED BY THE COURT.

Fatzer, J., dissents.