alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
12.503 Applicability of certain laws to Executive agency contracts for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services. ( a ) The following laws are not applicable to Executive agency contracts for the acquisition of commercial products or commercial services: ( 1 ) 10 U.S.C. 983, Institutions of Higher Education that Prevent ROTC Access or Military Recruiting on Campus: Denial of Grants and Contracts from Department of Defense, Department of Education, and Certain Other Departments and Agencies (see 9.110).
( 2 ) 31 U.S.C. 1354(a), Limitation on Use of Appropriated Funds for Contracts with Entities Not Meeting Veterans' Employment Reporting Requirements (see 22.1302).
( 3 ) 41 U.S.C. 1708(e)(3), Minimum Response Time for Offers (see 5.203).
( 4 ) 41 U.S.C. 2303(b), Policy on Personal Conflicts of Interest by Contractor Employees (see subpart 3.11).
( 5 ) 41 U.S.C. 3901(b) and 10 U.S.C. 3321(b) Contingent Fees (see 3.404).
( 6 ) 41 U.S.C. 4706(d)(1) and 10 U.S.C. 3841(d)(1), GAO Access to Contractor Employees, section 871 of Public Law 110-417 (see 52.214-26 and 52.215-2).
( 7 ) 41 U.S.C. chapter 65, Contracts for Materials, Supplies, Articles, and Equipment Exceeding $10,000 (see subpart 22.6).
( 8 ) 41 U.S.C. chapter 81, Drug-Free Workplace (see 26.501).
( 9 ) Section 806(a)(3) of Public Law 102-190, as amended by sections 2091 and 8105 of Public Law 103-355 (10 U.S.C. 4601 note prec.), Payment Protections for Subcontractors and Suppliers (see 28.106-6).
( 10 ) 15 U.S.C. 644(w), Solicitation Notice Regarding Administration of Change Orders for Construction (see 36.211).
( b ) Certain requirements of the following laws are not applicable to executive agency contracts for the acquisition of commercial products or commercial services: ( 1 ) 22 U.S.C. 2593e, Requirement for a certification under Measures Against Persons Involved in Activities that Violate Arms Control Treaties or Agreements with the United States (see 9.109).
( 2 ) 40 U.S.C. chapter 37, Requirement for a certificate and clause under the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards statute (see 22.305).
( 3 ) 41 U.S.C. 8703 and 8704, Requirement for a clause and certain other requirements related to kickbacks (see 3.502).
( 4 ) 49 U.S.C. 40118, Requirement for a clause under the Fly American provisions (see 47.405).
( c ) The applicability of the following laws have been modified in regard to Executive agency contracts for the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services: ( 1 ) 41 U.S.C. 4704 and 10 U.S.C. 4655, Prohibition on Limiting Subcontractor Direct Sales to the United States (see 3.503).
( 2 ) 41 U.S.C. chapter 35 and 10 U.S.C. chapter 271, Truthful Cost or Pricing Data (see 15.403).
( 3 ) 41 U.S.C. chapter 15, Cost Accounting Standards (see 48 CFR chapter 99) (see 12.214).
[60 FR 48241, Sept. 18, 1995] Editorial Note
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations affecting section 12.503, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the Finding Aids section of the printed volume and at *www.govinfo.gov .*
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-50249

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Arturo Coronado Angel-De Leon, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 2:19-CR-961-1

Before Higginbotham, Jones, and Costa, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Arturo Coronado Angel-De Leon was convicted of illegal reentry, in 

violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and sentenced above the advisory guidelines 

range to 24 months of imprisonment and a three-year term of supervised 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should 

not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 

5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 10, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 20-50249 Document: 00515520860 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/10/2020
No. 20-50249

2

release. The Government moves for summary affirmance or, alternatively, 

for an extension of time to file its brief.

The sole issue raised on appeal is whether it violates the Constitution 

to apply the enhanced sentencing range in § 1326(b) based on a prior 

conviction that was not alleged in the indictment or found by a jury beyond a 

reasonable doubt. Angel De-Leon concedes that the claim is foreclosed by 

Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), however, and raises 

it only to preserve the issue for further review.

Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and 

the Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time is DENIED. 

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 20-50249 Document: 00515520860 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/10/2020
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:13396
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 2 of 16 PageID #:13397
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 3 of 16 PageID #:13398
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 4 of 16 PageID #:13399
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 5 of 16 PageID #:13400
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 6 of 16 PageID #:13401
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 7 of 16 PageID #:13402
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 8 of 16 PageID #:13403
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 9 of 16 PageID #:13404
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 10 of 16 PageID #:13405
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 11 of 16 PageID #:13406
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 12 of 16 PageID #:13407
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 13 of 16 PageID #:13408
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 14 of 16 PageID #:13409
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 15 of 16 PageID #:13410
Case: 1:12-cv-00653 Document #: 331 Filed: 12/23/14 Page 16 of 16 PageID #:13411
### §1624. Authority of States and political subdivisions of States to limit assistance to aliens and to distinguish among classes of aliens in providing general cash public assistance

#### (a) In general

Subject to subsection (b) and notwithstanding any other provision of law, a State or political subdivision of a State is authorized to prohibit or otherwise limit or restrict the eligibility of aliens or classes of aliens for programs of general cash public assistance furnished under the law of the State or a political subdivision of a State.

#### (b) Limitation

The authority provided for under subsection (a) may be exercised only to the extent that any prohibitions, limitations, or restrictions imposed by a State or political subdivision of a State are not more restrictive than the prohibitions, limitations, or restrictions imposed under comparable Federal programs. For purposes of this section, attribution to an alien of a sponsor's income and resources (as described in section 1631 of this title) for purposes of determining eligibility for, and the amount of, benefits shall be considered less restrictive than a prohibition of eligibility for such benefits.

(Pub. L. 104–208, div. C, title V, §553, Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–681.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as part of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, and as part of the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, 1997, and not as part of title IV of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 which comprises this chapter.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 12, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 2458]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00354]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-764]


Bulk Manufacturer of Controlled Substances Application: Siegfried 
USA, LLC

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.

ACTION: Notice of application.

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

SUMMARY: Siegfried USA, LLC has applied to be registered as a bulk 
manufacturer of basic class(es) of controlled substance(s). Refer to 
Supplemental Information listed below for further drug information.

DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class(es), 
and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to 
the issuance of the proposed registration on or before March 15, 2021. 
Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the 
application on or before March 15, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement 
Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 
8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33(a), this 
is notice that on December 9, 2020, Siegfried USA, LLC, 33 Industrial 
Park Road, Pennsville, New Jersey 08070-3244, applied to be registered 
as an bulk manufacturer of the following basic class(es) of controlled 
substance(s):

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Drug
          Controlled substance             code          Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gamma Hydroxybutyric Acid..............     2010  I
Amphetamine............................     1100  II
Methylphenidate........................     1724  II
Amobarbital............................     2125  II
Pentobarbital..........................     2270  II
Secobarbital...........................     2315  II
Codeine................................     9050  II
Oxycodone..............................     9143  II
Hydromorphone..........................     9150  II
Hydrocodone............................     9193  II
Methadone..............................     9250  II
Methadone intermediate.................     9254  II
Morphine...............................     9300  II
Oripavine..............................     9330  II
Thebaine...............................     9333  II
Opium tincture.........................     9630  II
Oxymorphone............................     9652  II
Tapentadol.............................     9780  II
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The company plans to bulk manufacture the listed controlled 
substances in bulk for sale to its customers. No other activities for 
these drug codes are authorized for this registration.

William T. McDermott,
Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021-00354 Filed 1-11-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
1319.202-70 Small business set-aside review form. Form CD 570, Small Business Set-Aside Review, shall be submitted for approval to the Operating Unit Counsel Small Business Specialist, and forwarded to the OSDBU for approval. If applicable, the Form CD 570 will be submitted to the SBA Procurement Center Representative (PCR) for review. The Form CD 570 is required for: ( a ) Procurement actions valued above $100,000;
( b ) Modifications to existing contracts that add new work valued over $550,000 or that increase the total contract cost to over $550,000;
( c ) Consolidation of two or more procurement requirements for goods and services.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-41185

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CARDELL FITZGERALD ROBERTS,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:93-CR-161-1

- - - - - - - - - -

June 17, 1998

Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Cardell Fitzgerald Roberts appeals from the denial of his

motion, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), to reduce the term of

imprisonment imposed upon him. Roberts was sentenced to 200

months’ imprisonment and six years’ supervised release, after

pleading guilty to one count of possession with intent to

distribute cocaine base within 1,000 feet of a public school, in

violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 860. As the decision to

grant a § 3582(c)(2) motion is discretionary, we review the
No. 97-41185

-2-

district court’s ruling for an abuse of discretion. United

States v. Pardue, 36 F.3d 429, 430 (5th Cir. 1994).

Roberts argues that his sentence should be reduced, in light

of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Amendment 506 and United States v.

LaBonte, 117 S. Ct. 1673 (1997), because he claims that

application of Amendment 506 to his sentence would result in a

reduced term of imprisonment. See U.S.S.G. App. C amend. 506. 

However, in LaBonte, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that

Amendment 506 was inconsistent with, and was therefore

invalidated by, 28 U.S.C. § 994(h). 117 S. Ct. at 1677-79. 

Accordingly, as Robert relies upon Amendment 506 as the basis for

the reduction of his sentence, his motion was properly denied.

Roberts also argues that a § 841(a) violation is a

lesser-included offense of § 860, and, therefore, his conviction

for both offenses must be vacated as it is in violation of the

Double Jeopardy Clause. This argument is not cognizable in a

§ 3582(c)(2) motion, nor in an appeal from the denial of a

§ 3582(c)(2) motion. See Pardue, 36 F.3d at 430 (“A § 3582(c)(2)

motion applies only to guideline amendments that operate

retroactively, as listed in the policy statement, U.S.S.G.

§ 1B1.10(d).”) Even if we were to consider this argument,

because Roberts was convicted and sentenced only for a single

offense, there was no violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause. 

See United States v. Anderson, 987 F.2d 251, 254 (5th Cir.
No. 97-41185

-3-

1993)(Double Jeopardy Clause violated if defendant receives

multiple convictions and sentences for single act).

As Roberts’ arguments are without arguable merit, his appeal

is DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20

(5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
#### The People of the State of New York v. Joseph Kurash.

Enlargement of time granted. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, McNally and Stevens, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 9 (Thursday, January 14, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 3121]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-00718]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XA760]


New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is 
scheduling a public meeting of its Skate Committee via webinar to 
consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive 
economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to 
the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate.

DATES: This webinar will be held on Thursday, March 25, 2021 at 9 a.m. 
Webinar registration URL information: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/4163676123767056652.

ADDRESSES: Council address: New England Fishery Management Council, 50 
Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, 
New England Fishery Management Council; telephone: (978) 465-0492.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Agenda

    The Skate Committee will review supplemental scoping comments and 
background work of the Plan Development Team; Committee work on tasking 
the PDT, developing alternatives or other aspects of Amendment 5 to the 
Northeast Skate Complex Fishery Management. They will receive an update 
on progress and timeline of the Skate 2022-23 Specifications. Other 
business may be discussed, as necessary.
    Although non-emergency issues not contained on the agenda may come 
before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject 
of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted 
to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues 
arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action 
under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public 
has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to 
address the emergency. The public also should be aware that the meeting 
will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the 
recording is available upon request.

Special Accommodations

    This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-
0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: January 11, 2021.
Rey Israel Marquez,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National 
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2021-00718 Filed 1-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
- Skip to main content
- About Us
- Contact Us
- FAQs
-  Language Assistance ****   - English
  - español
  - 中文: 繁體版
  - Việt-ngữ
  - 한국어
  - Tagalog
  - Русский

U.S. Department of Education

U.S. Department of Education

            - Student Loans
            - Grants
            - Laws
            - Data

About EDCONTACTS

The headquarters and most operations are in Washington, D.C., where the staff of approximately 3,100 occupies parts of several different buildings. The main building, where the secretary’s office is located, is the Lyndon Baines Johnson Building at 400 Maryland Ave. SW. Additionally there are about 1,100 employees who work in 10 regional offices around the country. These offices represent the Department’s programs and interests on a regional basis.

----

  4 | 5 | 6TOC

 Printable view

## How Do I Find...

          - Student loans, forgiveness
          - College accreditation
          - Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
          - FERPA
          - FAFSA
          - 1098, tax forms

More >

## Information About...

          - Transforming Teaching
          - Family and Community Engagement
          - Early Learning

 

|  |
|--|
|  |
|  | Technical Contacts |  |
|  |
|  | Other Sites |  |
|  |

----

*Our mission*

Student Loans
Repaying LoansDefaulted LoansLoan ForgivenessLoan Servicers

Grants & Programs
Apply for Pell GrantsGrants ForecastApply for a GrantEligibility for Grants

Laws & Guidance
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)FERPACivil RightsNew IDEA Website

Data & Research
Education StatisticsPostsecondary Education DataED Data ExpressNation's Report CardWhat Works Clearinghouse

About Us
Contact UsED OfficesJobsPress ReleasesFAQsRecursos en españolBudget, PerformancePrivacy ProgramSubscribe to E-Mail Updates

----

          - Notices
          - FOIA
          - Privacy Policy
          - Accessibility
          - Security
          - Information quality
          - Inspector General
          - Whitehouse.gov
          - USA.gov
          - Benefits.gov
          - Regulations.gov
Re: PROPRIETARY and CONFIDENTIAL statement

Brian Nelson to

: 

OAR-2009-0472 

 

Cc

: 

 

 

 

If the statement "PROPRIETARY and CONFIDENTIAL" appears in any of these documents, please 

disregard it. That statement is a legacy from earlier versions of the document, and was never intended to 

be in the version released to the public. 

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

Brian J. Nelson 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Assessment and Standards Division 

2000 Traverwood Dr. 

Ann Arbor, MI 48105 

(734) 214-4278 

nelson.brian@epa.gov 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. George L. Anthony, Appellant.

Judgment convicting defendant of criminally possessing a pistol as a felony (Penal Law, § 1897), unanimously affirmed. Before enactment of section 1898-a of the Penal Law (now superseded by Penal Law, §§ 1899, 1900), mere presence in an automobile of a pistol and several persons was insufficient to establish constructive possession of the pistol by any of the persons *(People*v. *Di Landri,*250 App. Div. 52; *People ex rel. De Feo*v. *Warden of City Prison,*136 Misc. 836). Thus, the trial court, in the absence of the statutory presumption, would have been incorrect in charging on these facts that more than one of the persons in the automobile could exercise dominion over and have constructive possession of the pistol. However, the statute established a presumption that all of the persons “ found in such automobile at the time such weapon * * * is found ” illegally possessed the pistol, if one of them did not have a license. Consequently, if the presumption applied the charge given was actually more favorable to defendant than he deserved since it required a finding of dominion by defendant over the pistol, whereas the presumption did not. If the presumption did not apply, the charge was prejudicial in view of the above-cited eases. The presumption applied since it is undisputed and uncontradicted that immediately after the police officer saw the defendant leave the automobile, he kept it under observation, walked over to it, and saw the pistol inside before anyone or anything entered or left the automobile. Under these circumstances, the defendant was, under the statute, found in the automobile “at the time” the pistol was found there (cf. *People*v. *Russo,*278 App. Div. 98; *People*v. *Crenshaw,*202 Misc. 179, 183). The police officer did not conduct an illegal search and seizure by shining a flashlight into the automobile, seeing the pistol, and then seizing it (see *Smith*v. *State,*155 Tenn. 40; Anno: Search and Seizure Before Arrest, 89 ALR 2d 715, 721-729). Concur— Breitel, J. P., Rabin, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.
#### In the Matter of Schenectady Union Publishing Co., Appellant. Martin P. Catherwood, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, without costs, unless appellant perfects appeal, files note of issue, and files and serves record and brief on or before December 10, 1960 and is ready for argument at the January 1961 Term of this court, in which event the motion is denied.
**Exhibit 32.2**


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION
      1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
      2002


In
      condition with the Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of Polydex
      Pharmaceuticals Limited (the “Company”) for the fiscal year ended January 31,
      2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, Sharon L. Wardlaw, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 as adopted pursuant to section 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.


By
            /s/  Sharon L. WardlawSharon L. Wardlaw,Chief Financial OfficerMarch 21, 2006


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.


---