alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §9506. Limited appointments to career reserved Senior Executive Service positions

(a) In the application of section 3132, a "career reserved position" in the Internal Revenue Service means a position designated under section 3132(b) which may be filled only by—

(1) a career appointee; or

(2) a limited emergency appointee or a limited term appointee—

(A) who, immediately upon entering the career reserved position, was serving under a career or career-conditional appointment outside the Senior Executive Service; or

(B) whose limited emergency or limited term appointment is approved in advance by the Office of Personnel Management.

(b)(1) The number of positions described under subsection (a) which are filled by an appointee as described under paragraph (2) of such subsection may not exceed 10 percent of the total number of Senior Executive Service positions in the Internal Revenue Service.

(2) Notwithstanding section 3132—

(A) the term of an appointee described under subsection (a)(2) may be for any period not to exceed 3 years; and

(B) such an appointee may serve—

(i) two such terms; or

(ii) two such terms in addition to any unexpired term applicable at the time of appointment.

(Added Pub. L. 105–206, title I, §1201(a), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 714.)
### §796. Registry of disaster response contractors

#### (a) Definitions

In this section—

(1) the term "registry" means the registry created under subsection (b); and

(2) the terms "small business concern", "small business concern owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals", "small business concern owned and controlled by women", and "small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans" have the meanings given those terms under the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.).

#### (b) Registry

#### (1) In general

The Administrator shall establish and maintain a registry of contractors who are willing to perform debris removal, distribution of supplies, reconstruction, and other disaster or emergency relief activities.

#### (2) Contents

The registry shall include, for each business concern—

(A) the name of the business concern;

(B) the location of the business concern;

(C) the area served by the business concern;

(D) the type of good or service provided by the business concern;

(E) the bonding level of the business concern; and

(F) whether the business concern is—

(i) a small business concern;

(ii) a small business concern owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals;

(iii) a small business concern owned and controlled by women; or

(iv) a small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans.

#### (3) Source of information

#### (A) Submission

Information maintained in the registry shall be submitted on a voluntary basis and be kept current by the submitting business concerns.

#### (B) Attestation

Each business concern submitting information to the registry shall submit—

(i) an attestation that the information is true; and

(ii) documentation supporting such attestation.

#### (C) Verification

The Administrator shall verify that the documentation submitted by each business concern supports the information submitted by that business concern.

#### (4) Availability of registry

The registry shall be made generally available on the Internet site of the Agency.

#### (5) Consultation of registry

As part of the acquisition planning for contracting for debris removal, distribution of supplies in a disaster, reconstruction, and other disaster or emergency relief activities, a Federal agency shall consult the registry.

(Pub. L. 109–295, title VI, §697, Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1461.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The Small Business Act, referred to in subsec. (a)(2), is Pub. L. 85–536, §2(1 et seq.), July 18, 1958, 72 Stat. 384, which is classified generally to chapter 14A (§631 et seq.) of Title 15, Commerce and Trade. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 631 of Title 15 and Tables.
#### Harry Boyland et al., Respondents, v. Hannah Leifer, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

In an action to recover damages for injuries to person and property, defendant Hannah Leifer appeals from an order of the Supreme *492Court, Queens County, dated February 3, 1960, conditionally granting her motion to dismiss the complaint as against her for lack of diligent prosecution. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.
NEW GENERAL
EXAS

December 30, 1965

Hon. Bill Ratliff County Attorney Haskell County Haskell, Texas

Dear Mr. Ratliff: Re: Whether Article 2922-L, V.C.S.,governs the 'amount of collection fees a County Tax AssessorCollectormay receive or retain for his services in collecting the taxes for a rural high school district.

You have requested an opinion from this officeregarding the question of whether Article 2922-L,Vernon's Civil Statutes, OpinionNO. c-576

governs the amount of collection fees a County Tax AssessorCollectormay receive or retain for his services In collecting the taxes for a rural high schooldistrict.

You stated in our recent letter that the 59th Legislature by House Bfll No. J 2 3 amended Article 2792,Vernon's Civil Statutes,which governs the fees of the tax assessor-collector of independent school districts. In addition, the Legislature in the same bill amended Article 2795, Vernon's Civil Statutes, which governs the fees of the tax assessor-collectorof common school districts. However, the Legislaturemade no mention of Article 2922-L.

We find no specificreferencemade to Article 2922-L, in House Bill No. 243, or anything in the language of thebill which would evidence the intention of the Legislature to change fn any manner the statute governing the fees for the assessorcollector of rural high school districts. At most, the amendment of Article 2922-L would be by Implication only, and the law does not favor the amendment or repeal of a statuteby implication. Gordon v. C1.~6’,1; ;Jte";;;; v. Lake, 163 Tex. 392, 356 S.W.2d 138 McDonald, 129 Tex. 275, 102 S.W.2d 167, ); Standardv. Sadler, 383 S.W.2d 391 (Tex. Sup. i&); Amerfcan Canal Co. of Texas v. Dow Chemical Co., 380 S.W.2d 662 [Tex.Civ.App.-1964,error dism.).

-2750-Hon. Bill Ratliff, Page 2 OpinionNo. C-576

Article 2922-L, states inpart: 11

. . .The board of trustees of any rural high schooldistrictmay appoint an assessor of taxes who shall assess the taxableproperty within the limits of said district.

. . .The tax assessorhereinprovided for shall receive such compensation for his servicesas the trustees of said district may allow, not to exceed two (2)per,cent of taxes assessed by him. The county tax collector shall collect such tax and shall receive one-half of oneper cent forhis services for collectingsuch tax. (Emphasis added).

It is the opinion of this office that Article 2922-L, governs the amount of fees allowed the tax assessor and collector of a rural high schooldistrict. Inasmuchas the Legislature' has not repealed or amended this statute, the amount of collection fees a County tax assessor-collectormay receive or retain is one-half of oneper cent for his services for collecting such tax.

SUMMARY ---m-v- Article 2922-L,V.C.S., governs the amount of collection fees a CountyTax Assessor-Collectormay receive.
Very trulyyours,
WAffGONER

CARR Attorney General

TRG/fb/dl APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE W. V. Geppert, Chairman Gordon C. Cass W. E. Allen John Banks .GilbertPena 'APPROVEDFOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL By: T. B. Wright

-2781-
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 2 (Tuesday, January 5, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 296-297]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-29164]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural 
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

    Docket Numbers: RP21-336-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Rate Schedule S-2 Tracker 
Filing (ASA/PCB) eff 12/1/2020 to be effective 12/1/2020.
    Filed Date: 12/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20201228-5011.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP21-337-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing Penalty Revenue Crediting Report 
2020 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 12/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20201228-5048.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP21-338-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Compliance filing Penalty Revenue Crediting Report 
2020 to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 12/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20201228-5052.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP21-339-000.
    Applicants: Crossroads Pipeline Company.
    Description: Compliance filing 2020 Penalty Revenue Crediting 
Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 12/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20201228-5058.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/21.

    Docket Numbers: RP21-340-000.
    Applicants: ANR Pipeline Company.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Cashout Mechanism Update to be 
effective 2/1/2021.
    Filed Date: 12/28/20.
    Accession Number: 20201228-5101.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 1/11/21.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system 
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying 
the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above 
proceedings

[[Page 297]]

must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's 
Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern 
time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but 
intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing 
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying 
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 
(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: December 29, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-29164 Filed 1-4-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Clinical Guide > HIV Treatment

# Guide for HIV/AIDS Clinical CareSection 4: HIV Treatment- Antiretroviral Therapy
- Reducing Maternal-Infant HIV Transmission
- Care of HIV-Infected Pregnant Women
- Health Care of HIV-Infected Women through the Life Cycle
- Palliative Care and HIV
- Adherence
Appendix J – Disturbance Density Calculation Tool Manual 

Information on the Disturbance Density Calculation Tool has been incorporated into Appendix D. 

248
#### BRADLEY v. BEST SIGNS & SERVICES

No. 477P97

Case below: 127 N.C.App. 395

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 November 1997.
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-08-30T17:43:53-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
§ 200.2013 Motions. ( a ) An application to the ALJ for an order or ruling will be by motion. Motions will state the relief sought, the authority relied upon and the facts alleged, and will be filed with the ALJ and served on all other parties.
( b ) Except for motions made during a prehearing conference or at the hearing, all motions will be in writing. The ALJ may require that oral motions be reduced to writing.
( c ) Within 10 days after a written motion is served, or such other time as may be fixed by the ALJ, any party may file a response to such motion.
( d ) The ALJ may not grant a written motion before the time for filing responses has expired, except upon consent of the parties or following a hearing on the motion, but may overrule or deny such motion without awaiting a response.
( e ) The ALJ will make a reasonable effort to dispose of all outstanding motions prior to the beginning of the hearing.
#### Robert Richards, Appellant, v. Sague Realty Company, Inc., et al., Respondents.

Motion by respondent Prudential Insurance Company to dismiss appeal granted by default, with $10 costs, and appeal dismissed.
#### § 228.12 Physical protection of facilities.

The willful destruction of, or damage to any protected property, or any buildings or personal property thereon, is prohibited. The theft of any personal property, the creation of any hazard on protected property to persons or things, and the throwing of articles of any kind at buildings or persons on protected property is prohibited. The improper disposal of trash or rubbish, or any unauthorized or hazardous materials on protected property is also prohibited.
### SUBCHAPTER II—AGRICULTURAL TRADE INITIATIVES
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OFINDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board of Directors Cyanotech Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statement Nos. 33-63789, 33-55310, and 333-42484on Form S-8 and 333-42486 and 333-101401 on Form S-3of Cyanotech Corporation of our reports dated June 16, 2006, with respectto the consolidated balance sheets of Cyanotech Corporation and subsidiaries asof March 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of operations,stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for eachof the years in the three-year period ended March 31, 2006, and therelated financial statement schedule, which reports appear in the March 31,2006 annual report on Form 10-K of Cyanotech Corporation.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Honolulu, Hawaii

June 27, 2006

----
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 493



## ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION II No. CV-14-951
BETH’S BAIL BONDS, INC. APPELLANT

V.

STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE O PINION D ELIVERED S EPTEMBER 23, 2015 APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FIFTH DIVISION [NO. 60CR-13-2844, 60CV-14-1547] HONORABLE WENDELL GRIFFEN, JUDGE SUPPLEMENTAL ADDENDUM ORDERED
ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Chief JudgeBeth’s Bail Bonds, Inc. (BBB), appeals the Pulaski County Circuit Court’s bondforfeiture judgment filed April 17, 2014, and the July 11, 2014 order denying BBB’s motion to set aside the judgment. On appeal, the bonding company contends that (1) the circuit court was without jurisdiction to enter a judgment; (2) the county attorney’s office had no authority to demand judgment on behalf of the State; and (3) the circuit court abused its discretion by not setting aside the bond-forfeiture judgment under Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 60 (2014). We order rebriefing due to an inadequate addendum. BBB’s third point on appeal asks this court to review the circuit court’s decision to deny the motion to set aside the bond-forfeiture judgment. This motion was originally filed on June 11, 2014, and the response was filed on June 18, 2014. An amended motion to set aside forfeiture judgment and memorandum was filed on June 18, 2014, and the response wasCite as 2015 Ark. App. 493

filed on the same date. The addendum filed within BBB’s appellate brief contains only the original motion filed June 11, 2014, and the order denying the motion to set aside filed July 11, 2014. Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8)(A)(i) (2014) provides that, if any pleading to be included in the addendum was amended, the final version and any earlier version incorporated therein shall be included. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 4-2(b)(4), we order BBB to file a supplemental addendum, providing the necessary pleadings, within seven calendar days from the date of this opinion. Supplemental addendum ordered. W HITEAKER and H OOFMAN , JJ., agree. Charles D. Hancock , for appelant. Leslie Rutledge , Att’y Gen., by: Vada Berger, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.

2
#### Simon Marcus, Appellant, v. Ruth E. Jacobs, Respondent.

In an action to declare illusory and void: (a) the transfer and deposit in a bank account of certain moneys, and (b) the conveyance of certain real property, and for other relief, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered December 19, 1961, which granted defendant’s motion pursuant to rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice, to dismiss the amended complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. The amended complaint alleges, *inter alia,*that plaintiff is the surviving spouse of one Ann Marcus, deceased, who, shortly before their marriage, transferred the principal part of her property consisting of certain moneys and a two-family dwelling, to herself and the defendant, her daughter by a previous marriage, as joint tenants with the right of survivorship; that the transfers were not intended in good faith to divest the decedent of her property or any interest therein; that defendant is a nonresident of this State; that prior to the decedent’s death defendant was never in possession and control of the real property; that after the purported conveyance decedent remained in possession of the premises, exercised dominion and control over them, received all the rents and profits therefrom, paid all operating charges and made all repairs and improvements thereon; and that the transfers were illusory, testamentary in character and void as against plaintiff’s rights of inheritance. In our opinion, the amended complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action (cf. *Newman*v. *Dore,*275 N. Y. 371; *Gillette*v. *Madden,*280 App. Div. 161; *980
      *Schnakenberg*v. *Schnakenberg,*262 App. Div. 234; *Mottershead*v. *Lamson,*101 N. Y. S. 2d 174). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
### §702. Right of review

A person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action within the meaning of a relevant statute, is entitled to judicial review thereof. An action in a court of the United States seeking relief other than money damages and stating a claim that an agency or an officer or employee thereof acted or failed to act in an official capacity or under color of legal authority shall not be dismissed nor relief therein be denied on the ground that it is against the United States or that the United States is an indispensable party. The United States may be named as a defendant in any such action, and a judgment or decree may be entered against the United States: Provided, That any mandatory or injunctive decree shall specify the Federal officer or officers (by name or by title), and their successors in office, personally responsible for compliance. Nothing herein (1) affects other limitations on judicial review or the power or duty of the court to dismiss any action or deny relief on any other appropriate legal or equitable ground; or (2) confers authority to grant relief if any other statute that grants consent to suit expressly or impliedly forbids the relief which is sought.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 392; Pub. L. 94–574, §1, Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2721.)

| Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | 5 U.S.C. 1009(a). | June 11, 1946, ch. 324, §10(a), 60 Stat. 243. |

Statutes at Large

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1976—Pub. L. 94–574 removed the defense of sovereign immunity as a bar to judicial review of Federal administrative action otherwise subject to judicial review.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DANNY FABRICANT, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

A. MIRANDA, individually and in his/her 

official capacity as Unit C-2 Case Manager; 

et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 21-16345 

D.C. No. 4:19-cv-00029-JCH 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

John C. Hinderaker, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 17, 2022**

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Federal prisoner Danny Fabricant appeals pro se from the district court’s 

summary judgment for failure to exhaust administrative remedies in his action 

brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

MAY 26 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 21-16345 

Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), alleging an Eighth Amendment claim. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, Quintero Perez v. United 

States, 8 F.4th 1095, 1104 (9th Cir. 2021), and we affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Fabricant

failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, and failed to raise a genuine dispute 

of material fact as to whether administrative remedies were effectively 

unavailable. See Albino v. Baca, 747 F.3d 1162, 1172 (9th Cir. 2014) (en 

banc) (setting forth exhaustion framework under the Prison Litigation Reform Act 

(“PLRA”)); see also Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. 632, 643-44 (2016) (describing 

limited circumstances in which administrative remedies are unavailable); Porter v. 

Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 524 (2002) (requiring PLRA exhaustion for federal 

prisoners’ Bivens actions).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by partially granting 

Fabricant’s requests for extensions of time to respond to defendants’ motion for 

summary judgment. See FTC v. Gill, 265 F.3d 944, 954-55, 957 (9th Cir. 2001)

(setting forth standard of review and explaining a district court has broad discretion 

to control its docket). We do not consider Fabricant’s contention that the district 

court erred by failing to provide him a copy of his own filing in light of his 

acknowledged receipt of the document as part of this appeal.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Fabricant’s motion 
3 21-16345 

for discovery because Fabricant did not show that the sought-after facts were 

essential to his opposition. See Garrett v. City & County of San Francisco, 818 

F.2d 1515, 1518 (9th Cir. 1987) (setting forth standard of review).

AFFIRMED.
#### In the Matter of the Probate of the Will of William A. Moody, Deceased. Gardina M. Whittingham et al., Appellants; Elizabeth Moody, as Executrix of William A. Moody, Deceased, Respondent.

This motion by petitioners to compel acceptance of their notice of appeal was held in abeyance pending hearings before an Official Referee as to whether the order appealed from was duly served and the date of service^ and pending his report. The Referee has now filed the minutes of the hearings and his report in which be finds that a copy of the order, with notice of its entry, was duly served upon petitioner’s attorney on the date claimed by the attorney for the executrix respondent, namely: on March 31, 1960. The court approves the Referee’s finding. The motion to compel acceptance of the notice of appeal is denied. Beldock, Acting P. J., Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.