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

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 533 

To modernize the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 6, 2017 

Mr. NELSON (for himself, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mr. MARKEY, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. MURPHY, 

Mr. REED, and Mr. WHITEHOUSE) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To modernize the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988. 

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 ‘‘Undetectable Firearms 

5 Modernization Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. MODERNIZATION OF THE PROHIBITION ON UNDE7 TECTABLE FIREARMS. 

8 Section 922(p) of title 18, United States Code, is 

9 amended— 

10 (1) in paragraph (1)— 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 533 IS

1 (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking 

2 ‘‘grips, stocks, and magazines’’ and inserting 

3 ‘‘all parts other than a major component’’; and 

4 (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking 

5 ‘‘when subjected to inspection by the types of x6 ray machines commonly used at airports, does 

7 not generate’’ and inserting the following: ‘‘if 

8 subjected to inspection by the types of detection 

9 devices commonly used at airports for security 

10 screening, would not generate’’; 

11 (2) in paragraph (2)— 

12 (A) by striking subparagraph (B) and in13 serting the following: 

14 ‘‘(B) the term ‘major component’, with respect 

15 to a firearm— 

16 ‘‘(i) means the slide or cylinder or the 

17 frame or receiver of the firearm; and 

18 ‘‘(ii) in the case of a rifle or shotgun, in19 cludes the barrel of the firearm; and’’; and 

20 (B) by striking subparagraph (C) and all 

21 that follows through the end of the undesig22 nated matter following subparagraph (C) and 

23 inserting the following: 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 533 IS

1 ‘‘(C) the term ‘Security Exemplar’ means an 

2 object, to be fabricated at the direction of the Attor3 ney General, that is— 

4 ‘‘(i) constructed of 3.7 ounces of material 

5 type 17–4 PH stainless steel in a shape resem6 bling a handgun; and 

7 ‘‘(ii) suitable for testing and calibrating 

8 metal detectors.’’; 

9 (3) in paragraph (3)— 

10 (A) in the first sentence, by inserting 

11 ‘‘, including a prototype,’’ after ‘‘of a fire12 arm’’; and 

13 (B) by striking the second sentence; 

14 and 

15 (4) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘shall not 

16 apply to any firearm which’’ and all that follows and 

17 inserting the following: ‘‘shall not apply to— 

18 ‘‘(A) any firearm received by, in the possession 

19 of, or under the control of the United States; or 

20 ‘‘(B) the manufacture, importation, possession, 

21 transfer, receipt, shipment, or delivery of a firearm 

22 by a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer pur23 suant to a contract with the United States.’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 10.3

GRAPHIC

December 26,
2008

Timothy
Bixler

Dear
Tim:

Reference
is made to the (change-in-control) Severance Agreement entered into by and between you and International Rectifier Corporation (the
"Severance Agreement").

The
purpose of this letter is to supplement the terms of the Severance Agreement to include terms and conditions designed to make any payments pursuant to the Severance Agreement
compliant with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (including the Treasury Regulations and other published guidance related thereto)
("Section 409A").

Your
Severance Agreement is hereby modified as follows; capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Severance Agreement:

1.Severance.Subject to the conditions of payment described in Section 10 relating to specified
employees, any Cash Severance payable pursuant to Section 2(b) of the Severance Agreement shall be paid in a cash lump sum on the 60th day following your "separation from
service," provided you have promptly executed and delivered (and not revoked) a Release Agreement within 50 days of your termination; provided, however, that if you fail to execute and deliver
such release, or you revoke such release, you shall not be paid any Cash Severance pursuant to the Severance Agreement. For this purpose, a "separation from service" shall be defined within the
meaning of Treasury Regulation Section 1.409A-1(h)(1), without regard to the optional alternative definitions available thereunder.

Except
as modified hereby, your Severance Agreement remains unmodified. Please indicate your agreement with the foregoing by signing where indicated below.

Regards,

INTERNATIONAL
RECTIFIER CORPORATION

By:
Its: Assistant Secretary

Acknowledged
and agreed:

|              
|--------------
|              
|Timothy Bixler

---



QuickLinks
(June 25, 1963)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Julio Vega Diaz, Appellant.

Judgment convicting defendant of the crimes of robbery in the first degree, grand larceny in the first degree and assault in the second degree, unanimously affirmed. On this record the guilt of defendant is established beyond a reasonable doubt. Error is assigned to the alleged receipt of post-arraignment and post-indictment admissions. Evidence was received of admissions made by defendant on March 4, 1961 while he was imprisoned in the Tombs on another charge and before the instant indictment. We find no authority for the proposition that once a defendant has been arraigned or indicted for a crime in one county he may not be officially questioned with respect to and prior to indictment on an unrelated crime in another county. Defendant’s cross-examination of Detective O’Neill elicited that while defendant was being fingerprinted on March 29, 1961 a general discussion of about 15 minutes duration was had between defendant and Detective O’Neill, who testified to defendant’s admissions on March 4, 1961. The record contains no evidence as to the substance of the March 29, 1961 conversation. Defendant asserts error in the charge. The court charged: *“*Now, at the request of the defense counsel, Mr. Fusco, the Court charges the jury at this time that if you are not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the entire sum and substance of Detective O’Neill’s conversation with defendant as testified by Detective O’Neill took place on March 4, 1961, but that some part did not take place until March 29, 1961, then you must disregard O’Neill’s testimony as to said conversation with defendant on March 4th.” Defendant argues the said charge enabled the jury to consider the evidence as to the conversation on March 29, 1961. The record clearly shows no misapprehension as to the exclusion of any conversation the jury found to have occurred on March 29, 1961. No objection was made nor taken by defendant. Moreover, it is *612apparent the court would have complied with a request for a further instruction thereon if defendant had made a request therefor since prior to the said charge, in a colloquy at the Bench, defendant had requested and the court had approved the following: “Mr. Fusco: The second request would be to the effect that if the jury finds that some portion of the conversation between the defendant and O’Neill, Detective O’Neill, which Detective O’Neill testified to on direct examination, if the jury finds that some portion of that was elicited on March 29th, and that would be subsequent to indictment, that then they are to disregard his entire testimony as to conversations had with this defendant. The Court: All right. I will so charge. Say that again.” Counsel for the defendant was satisfied with the charge as given since it is clear from the foregoing that it would have been amplified on request. We have considered the other alleged errors urged by defendant and find them without merit, and affirm under section 542 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Concur — Rabin, J. P., McNally, Stevens, Eager and Stener, JJ.
Letter from InfoSpace, Inc



 EXHIBIT 10.29 
 April 7, 2006 
 Dear Allen, 
 Thank you for agreeing to assume the role of interim chief financial officer effective upon the resignation of David Rostov, the
Company’s current CFO. 
 The following terms shall apply in the event that you are not named the CFO as a result of the recruiting and selection
process. 
  

	 	1)	You agree to remain with Infospace for a transition period of at least 6 months from the effective date of the appointment of the new CFO by the Board of Directors. This period may
be extended or shortened by mutual agreement. During this six-month transition period, you will work to recruit and train a replacement chief accounting officer and transition all ongoing work. You and the new CFO will work to establish objectives
that will measure a successful transition. 

  

	 	2)	Upon successful completion of the transition, you will be eligible for an enhanced severance package equivalent to one year of your then current annual base salary and target bonus.


 You will have 90 days after the start date of the CFO to decide if you want to invoke the terms above. After 90 days, the enhanced severance
package terms shall expire. 
 If, however, you decide to remain with the company, you will be eligible for a subjective performance bonus in recognition for
your work during the interim period. This bonus amount will be determined based upon length of time in interim role and your performance during the interim period. 
 Please let me know if you have any additional questions. 
  

	
	 /s/ Jim Voelker

	 CEO

	 InfoSpace, Inc.
<PAGE>



                                                                      EXHIBIT 32


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Environmental Tectonics
Corporation (the "Company") for the fiscal quarter ended May 28, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
William F. Mitchell, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Duane D.
Deaner, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

      (1)    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
             15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
             material respects, the financial condition and result of operations
             of the Company.


                                        /s/ William F. Mitchell
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        William F. Mitchell
                                        Chief Executive Officer


                                        /s/ Duane D. Deaner
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Duane D. Deaner
                                        Chief Financial Officer

                                        July 12, 2004


         This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed to be filed by the Company for purpose
of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

         A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 761.4 Special provisions. ( a ) Entry into islands in the Kwajalein Atoll under military jurisdiction is controlled by the Department of the Army. Inquiries concerning entries into islands under military control in the Kwajalein Atoll should be directed to: National Range Commander, U.S. Army Safeguard System Command, ATTN: SSC-R, P.O. Box 1500, Huntsville, AL 35807.
( b ) Entry into Eniwetok Atoll is controlled by the Defense Nuclear Agency. Inquiries concerning entries into Eniwetok Atoll should be directed to: Commander, Field Command, Defense Nuclear Agency, Kirtland Air Force Base, NM 87115.
( c ) Entry into Johnston Atoll is controlled by the Defense Nuclear Agency. Inquiries concerning entries into Johnston Atoll should be directed to: Commander, Johnston Atoll (FCDNA), APO San Francisco, CA 96305.
( d ) *Suspension of restrictions.* Restrictions imposed under the authority of the above cited Executive Orders on entry into the following Naval Defensive Sea Areas and Naval Airspace Reservations and Administrative Areas have been suspended subject to reinstatement without notice at any time when the purposes of national defense may require. ( 1 ) All Naval Airspace Reservations, except the Guantanamo Bay Naval Airspace Reservation
( 2 ) Honolulu Defensive Sea Area.
( 3 ) Kiska Island Naval Defensive Sea Area.
( 4 ) Kodiak Island Naval Defensive Sea Area.
( 5 ) Unalaska Island Naval Defensive Sea Area.
( 6 ) Wake Island Naval Defensive Sea Area except for entry of foreign flag ships and foreign nationals.
( 7 ) The portion of Kaneohe Defensive Sea Area lying beyond a 500 yard buffer zone around the perimeter of the Kaneohe Marine Corps Air Station (Mokapu Peninsula) and eastward therefrom to Kapoho Point, Oahu.
( e ) Suspension of restrictions on entry into a naval airspace reservation, naval defensive sea area, or naval administrative area, does not affect the authority of a commanding officer or other appropriate commander to control entry into or passage through any base, station, or other installation or area, including port or harbor facilities under Navy control.
[41 FR 28957, July 14, 1976]
### §1421d. Commodity reports

#### (a) Crop reports

The Secretary of Agriculture (hereafter in this section referred to as the "Secretary") shall gather data from producers to be used to develop crop reports to be distributed by the Secretary during the growing season. The report shall contain statements of the conditions of those crops by State, with such explanations, comparisons, and information as may be useful for illustrating such reports.

#### (b) Special reports

#### (1) In general

In addition to the reports compiled pursuant to subsection (a), the Secretary shall annually survey producers for information for reports regarding supply, acreage, production, disposition, and prices for the following commodities as determined by the Secretary:

(A) 25 fresh market vegetables;

(B) 3 processing vegetables;

(C) 6 fruits and nuts;

(D) 17 forage and turf seeds;

(E) 50 vegetable seeds; and

(F) maple syrup.

#### (2) Administrative

The Secretary shall annually prepare a report containing results of the surveys described in paragraph (1) in such States as determined by the Secretary. Such reports shall be submitted to and officially approved by the Secretary of Agriculture before being issued or published.

#### (c) Tree inventories

The Secretary shall survey producers for information for reports regarding fruit and nut tree inventories. Such surveys and reports shall be conducted, printed, and distributed on a regular basis every 3 to 5 years as determined by the Secretary. Reports shall be submitted to and officially approved by the Secretary before being issued or published.

#### (d) Omitted

#### (e) Authorization

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.

(Pub. L. 101–624, title XXV, §2514, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4074.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990, and not as part of the Agricultural Act of 1949 which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of the 1949 Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 1421 of this title and Tables.

Section is comprised of section 2514 of Pub. L. 101–624. Subsec. (d) of section 2514 of Pub. L. 101–624 repealed section 411a of this title.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Leslie George Smith, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court of Cortland County under which he was resentenced to from 71⁄2 to 15 years at Attica Prison. On September 10, 1956 the defendant was indicted on four counts of forgery in the second degree as a third offense with the indictment setting forth the two previous felonies. He was assigned counsel, plead not guilty but then withdrew his plea and plead guilty on one count. On October 29, 1956 he was sentenced to from 71⁄2 to 15 years at Attica Prison and the other three counts of the indictment were dismissed. In May of 1959 the defendant instituted a habeas corpus proceeding contending that section 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure had not been complied with at the time of his sentencing. The writ was sustained and he was ordered returned to Cortland County for resentencing. At the resentencing on June 15, 1959 the defendant was represented by counsel and motions in arrest of judgment were made contending that the indictment was faulty in that it did not set forth that the second felony alleged was committed before the first felony and further on the basis of section 275-b of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was enacted in 1957 to the effect that previous convictions for crimes shall no longer be set forth in the indictment. The court denied the motions and again sentenced the defendant to from 7% to 15 years at Attica Prison. The defendant contends that under section 275-b the indictment was defective since it set forth prior convictions. Section 275-b was not enacted until 1957, this indictment was returned in 1956 and even though the defendant was resenteneed on it in 1959 section 275-b "would not affect the validity of an indictment that predated its effective date. The contention that the indictment must show, in regard to the prior two convictions, that one was committed after the other is likewise without merit. The defendant contends that the probation report referred to by the Judge listed crimes he had not committed. However, he raised certain objections to that at the time of the sentencing and the Judgé stated that even accepting the corrections he would impose the same sentence. Further the argument that there is no such crime as forgery in the second degree as a third offense is baseless for it clearly refers to the defendant being a third offender. Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs.
MEMORANDUM

THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION

WASHINGTON, DC 20202

TO: Assistant Secretary for Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development 

FROM: Secretary

SUBJECT: Delegation of Authority 

I. DELEGATION

Under the authority vested in me by section 412 of the Department of Education 

Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. 3472, and subject to the reservations noted below, I hereby 

delegate to you, to your successor in function, or to anyone serving for you in an acting 

capacity or delegated the authority to perform the functions and duties of your position, 

the authority to administer the Department’s responsibilities under and related to the 

following statutes and implementing regulations: 

A. the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1232g and 34 

CFR Part 99); and 

B. the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1232h and 34 

CFR Part 98); 

C. the Armed Forces Recruiter Access to Students and Student Recruiting Information 

(Title VIII, Part F, Subpart 2, Sec. 8528 of the Elementary and Secondary Education 

Act of 1965, as amended (20 U.S.C. 7908)); 

Unless otherwise noted in future delegations of authority, amendments to the authority 

delegated herein are included in the scope of this delegation. 

II. RESERVATIONS

Unless otherwise noted in existing or future delegations of authority, the following are 

not delegated: 

A. the authority to sign Federal Register notices;

B. the authority to award contracts and discretionary grants; 

C. the authority to appoint, and fix compensation of, members of advisory councils; and

D. unless otherwise provided by law, the authority to submit reports to Congress or 

the President.
III. REDELEGATIONS

Subject to the provisions of the Acts, and unless otherwise noted, you may redelegate the 

authorities delegated to you. All redelegations must be prepared in accordance with the 

Administrative Communications System directive, OM:1-102: Delegations of Authority. 

IV. CERTIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE

This delegation is effective upon certification by the Department’s Principal Delegations 

Control Officer and supersedes Delegation Control No. EA/EM/386 certified on March 

26, 2011. 

I hereby ratify actions within the scope of this delegation taken by you prior to 

certification of this delegation.

Betsy DeVos (signed) 

DeborahFriendly

OGC Review and Date: 

Debbie Friendly

4/21/2020

Date Certified: 4/22/2020

Departmental Delegations Control Officer: Jim Clemmens 

Control Number: EA/ED/13
### §5921a. Repealed. Pub. L. 110–234, title VII, §7411, May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1255, and Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title VII, §7411, June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2017

Section, Pub. L. 107–171, title X, §10802, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 525, related to public information campaign regarding use of biotechnology in producing food for human consumption.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 repealed this section. Pub. L. 110–234 was repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as an Effective Date note under section 8701 of this title.
§ 2004.38 Safeguarding and marking. ( a ) *Safeguarding approval.* ( 1 ) The CSA determines whether an entity's safeguarding capability meets requirements established in 32 CFR part 2001, and other applicable national level policy (*e.g.,* Atomic Energy Act for RD). If the CSA makes a favorable determination, the entity may store classified information at that level or below. If the determination is not favorable, the CSA must ensure that the entity does not possess classified information or does not possess information at the classification level denied or a higher level.
( 2 ) The CSA maintains records of its safeguarding capability determinations and, upon request from GCAs or entities, and as appropriate and to the extent authorized by law, verifies that it has made a favorable safeguarding determination for a given entity and at what level.
( b ) *Marking.* The GCA provides guidance to entities that meets requirements in 32 CFR 2001.22, 2001.23, 2001.24, and 2001.25, Derivative classification, Classification marking in the electronic environment, Additional requirements, and Declassification markings; ISOO's marking guide, *Marking Classified National Security Information;* and other applicable national level policy (*e.g.,* Atomic Energy Act for RD) for marking classified information and material.