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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [LLMT924000-L14300000.FR0000; MTM 99415]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice of correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Bureau of Land Management published a Notice of Realty Action application for Recordable Disclaimer of Interest; Montana in the                         **Federal Register**                         on December 23, 2009 (74 FR 68280). The document contained an incorrect acreage figure and proposed action in the                         **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**                         section.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sandra Ward, 406-896-5052.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of December 23, 2009, the acreage following the legal description is corrected to read “147.76 acres” and on page 74 FR 68281, in the second paragraph, the words “legislative withdrawal” are corrected to read “disclaimer”.                

Cindy Staszak,

Chief, Branch of Land Resources.

[FR Doc. 2010-2851 Filed 2-9-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-$$-P
#### In the Matter of Sunset Taxi Company, Inc., Petitioner, v Barbara Blum, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, et al., Respondents.

— Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent State commissioner dated March 9, 1978 and made after a statutory fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency disqualifying petitioner from participation in the medical assistance program with State-wide effect and requiring restitution of moneys overpaid. Determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits, with costs. The determination that petitioner engaged in unacceptable billing practices by overstating the mileage on its claims was supported by substantial evidence. There was testimony from the investigator who clocked the actual mileage on 333 of the 2,153 claims submitted by petitioner and from the clerk who conducted the audit of petitioner’s claims by comparing the mileage claimed by petitioner with the actual mileage as determined by the investigator and extrapolating the overstatement on the 333 claims over all 2,153 claims. In addition, copies of the claims submitted by petitioner, of the investigator’s report, and of police certification of the calibration of the investigator’s car, *inter alia,*were admitted as evidence. Petitioner contends that there is no evidence to support the finding of overbilling on the 1,820 claims that were the subject of the extrapolation. This contention is incorrect. "Fair sampling is a proper method, usable particularly by administrative agencies, to establish at least prima facie the existence of an average fact pattern on a number of occasions or over a period of time” *(Matter of Inwood Post No. 581, Amer. Legion v State Bingo Control Comm.,*22 AD2d 884, 885, affd 17 NY2d 699). While petitioner was *692given full opportunity to refute the inferences arising from the respondents’ sampling, it did not do so. As regards samples of objective facts rather than of group or public opinion, the contention that sample evidence provides no evidence for the goods or claims not sampled was rejected long ago (see *Muller*v *Eno,*14 NY 597; *Gerdau Co. v Bowne-Morton Stores,*1 AD2d 581, affd 2 NY2d 905; 2 Bender’s New York Evidence, § 53.02 [2]; see, generally, 1 Frumer & Friedman, Products Liability, § 6.02, p 75). In any event, adherence to technical rules of evidence applicable in a trial court is not necessary in an administrative proceeding (State Administrative Procedure Act, § 306) and the instant sampling was not so palpably deficient on its face as to mandate exclusion. Petitioner also raises questions regarding the admissibility of some of the exhibits. In light of the adequate foundation laid by the testimony of the investigator and the clerk, and in light of the nature of the hearing, this evidence was admissible (State Administrative Procedure Act, § 306, subd 1; *Matter of Brown v Ristich,*36 NY2d 183). In view of the whole record, the evidence against petitioner was not deficient. Damiani, J. P., O’Connor, Lazer and Rabin, JJ., concur.
(January 31, 1980)

#### Victoria Smith, Respondent, v Johnson Products Co., Inc., et al., Respondents, and Wolkow & Sons, Appellant.

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County entered on January 19, 1979, unanimously affirmed, without prejudice to renewal after discovery of Lawndale Products, Inc., without costs and without disbursements. No opinion. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Silverman, Bloom and Lynch, JJ.
2006-0147.

#### State v. Bradley.

Champaign App. No. 2004-CA-15, 2005-Ohio-6533. Reported at 109 Ohio St.3d 1425, 2006-Ohio-1967, 846 N.E.2d 534. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.

Resnick and O’Connor, JJ., dissent.
Fw: EGU MATS -- Suggestion for BTF RobertJ Wayland to: Bill Maxwell 11/16/2012 10:13 AM

Here's the last change.

----- Forwarded by RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US on 11/16/2012 10:13 AM

-----

From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 11/16/2012 10:12 AM Subject: EGU MATS -- Suggestion for BTF

Hi Bob, Here’s the suggested change to help clarify the text regarding the beyond the floor analysis:

Move the following text from page 24 of the most recent redline as a footnote to the sentence “The Agency derived these limits by first calculating the floor standards and then assessing whether a more stringent beyond-the-floor standard is appropriate” on page 16 of the redline: CAA section 112(d)(2) requires the EPA to consider whether more stringent beyond-the-floor standards should be established

Alternatively, for brevity, the footnote could read “as required by CAA section 112(d)(2)”

Thanks, Cortney

________________________________________________ Cortney Higgins Policy Analyst OMB/OIRA/NRE 202.395.7856 chiggins@omb.eop.gov
###### Editorial Note on Part 1942

#### Editorial Notes:

Nomenclature changes to part 1942 appear at 80 FR 9878, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1942.120-1942.121 [Reserved]
ex10-24.htm


 


Exhibit 10.24




 


NOTE AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION AGREEMENT




 


This NOTE AMENDMENT AND EXTENSION AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made effective as of December 31, 2012, between BIO-KEY INTERNATIONAL, INC. (“Company”), and Thomas J. Colatosti. (“Holder”).


 


RECITALS:


 


A.          The Holder is the holder of the Seven Percent (7%) Promissory Note Due December 31, 2012 issued by the Company in the principal amount of $350,804 (the “Note”), the current principal amount $321,428 of which, together with accrued interest, is outstanding on the date hereof.


 


B.          At the request of the Company, the Holder has agreed to extend the Maturity Date of the Note as hereinafter set forth.


 


C.          Capitalized terms used herein without definition shall have the respective meanings ascribed to them in the Note.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants and conditions contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties covenant and agree as follows:


 


1.             Representation and Warranty. The Company represents and warrants to the Holder that no Payment Default or Event of Default has occurred and is continuing under the Note.


 


2.             Amendment and Extension. Subject to the truth and accuracy of the foregoing representation and warranty, effective as of the date hereof, the Note is amended as follows:


 


(a)            the first sentence of the Note is amended to read as follows:


 


“FOR VALUE RECEIVED, BIO-KEY INTERNATIONAL, INC., a corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, U.S.A. (the “Company”), promises to pay to the order of Thomas J. Colatosti, the registered holder hereof and its successors and assigns (the “Holder”), Three hundred twenty one thousand, four hundred twenty eight dollars $321,428 (plus accrued interest) and to pay interest on the principal sum outstanding, at the rate of seven percent (7%) per annum, due and payable by March 31, 2013 (the “Maturity Date”).”


 


3.             General Provisions.


 


(a)         The amendment and extension set forth herein shall not affect any other term or provision of the Note, which Note, as amended and extended hereby, shall continue in full force and effect and is hereby ratified and approved by the Company.


 


(b)         This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall for all purposes be deemed to be an original and all of which constitute the same instrument.


 


[No further text on this page]


 




  





  











  






 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth above.


 


 



	 	
Company:

	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	
BIO-KEY INTERNATIONAL, INC.

	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	
By:

	/s/ Cecilia Welch	 
	 	 	

Name: Cecilia Welch



	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	
Title:  CFO

	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	
Holder:

	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	
Thomas J. Colatosti

	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	
By:

	/s/ Thomas J. Colatosti	 
	 	 	
Name: Thomas J. Colatosti
Featured Grant OpportunitySchool Emergency Response to Violence (Project SERV) (Funding Opportunity) 

Featured Grant OpportunityShare with Youth: NOAA Student Opportunities Database

Featured Grant OpportunityShort Courses in Social Determinants of Health for Research Education in Nursing Research (Funding...

Featured Grant OpportunityComprehensive Partnerships to Advance Cancer Health Equity (CPACHE) Program (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityRisk and Protective Factors of Family Health and Family Level Interventions (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityPersonnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities--Doctoral...

Featured Grant OpportunityStanding Announcement for Tribal Title IV-E Plan Development Grants (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityProviding Research Education Experiences to Enhance Inclusivity for a Diverse Substance Use and...

Featured Grant OpportunityFY 2024 Research on School-Based Hate Crimes (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityChallenge America (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityResearch and Evaluation on Firearm Violence and Mass Shootings (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityNational Juvenile Court Data Archive (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityGraduate Research Fellowship (Funding Opportunity)

Featured Grant OpportunityCommunity Programs for Outreach and Intervention with Youth and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk...

Featured Grant OpportunityPrint and Disseminate Child Victims and Witnesses Support Materials (Funding Opportunity)

## Breadcrumb

            -  Announcements 
            -           Resource: Going to a Public Disaster Shelter During the COVID-19 Pandemic      

# Resource: Going to a Public Disaster Shelter During the COVID-19 Pandemic

This webpage provides tips to help you prepare and lower the risk of COVID-19 infection while staying safe in a shelter. Guidance includes how to prepare for the shelter, protect yourself and others while in a public shelter, help your children stay safe while in a public shelter, and protect your pets while in a public shelter. **Learn more.**
#### Maude Grant, appellant, v. Z. Z. Lyerla and T. F. Aldridge, appellees.

Opinion filed June 5, 1929.

Rehearing denied July 16, 1929.

C. C. Crawford and Hosea V. Ferrell, for appellant; Hay, counsel. H. A. Spann and R. Wallace Karraker, for appellees.

Mr. Presiding Justice Barry

delivéred the opinion of the court.
class ProgramSelector extends HTMLElement {
  constructor() {
    super();
    this.attachShadow({ mode: 'open' })
  }

  connectedCallback() {
    this.render();

  }

  render() {
    const component = this;

    this.getPrograms().then(data => {
      this.programs = data;

      // this.programs = ;
      if (!this.programs) { return; }

      // Build layout
      var layout = '';

      layout += `<div id='tpp-program-selector' part='wrapper'>`;
      layout += this.buildList(this.programs);
      layout += `</div>`;

      this.shadowRoot.innerHTML = layout;

      this.shadowRoot.addEventListener("change", function (e) {
        component.goToLink(e.target);
      });

    });
  }

  /**
   * Returns a json list of programs
   *
   * @author Matt Decker <mdecker@air.org>
   *
   * @param Array An array of elements
   * @returns Element
   */
  async getPrograms() {
    try {
      const response = await fetch('/ajax/tpper/programs/json', {
        method: 'GET',
        headers: {
          Accept: 'application/json',
        },
      });

      if (!response.ok) {
        throw new Error(`Error! status: ${response.status}`);
      }

      const result = await response.json();
      return result;
    } catch (err) {
      console.log(err);
    }
  }

  goToLink(selectElement) {
    var selectedOption = selectElement.options[selectElement.selectedIndex];
    var link = selectedOption.value;
    window.location.href = link;
  }

  buildList(arr)
  {
    var output =  `<select part='select'>`;
        output += `<option value="">Select...</option>`;
    for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
      output += `<option value="${arr[i].link}">${arr[i].title}</option>`;
    }
    output += `</select>`;
    return output;
  }
}

customElements.define('component-tpp-program-select', ProgramSelector);
#### § 1901.251 Purpose.

This subpart prescribes Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) or its successor agency under Public Law 103-354 policies, procedures, and guidelines for compliance with section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-665), the Reservoir Salvage Act of 1960 (Pub. L. 86-523), as amended May 24, 1974, by the Archeologic and Historic Preservation Act (Pub. L. 93-291), and section 1(3) of Executive Order 11593. This subpart is inapplicable to Farm Service Agency, Farm Loan Programs.

[42 FR 62141, Dec. 9, 1977, as amended at 72 FR 64121, Nov. 15, 2007]
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**AFFINITY GROUP HOLDING, INC.**

 

**STATEMENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

I, Thomas F. Wolfe, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officerof Affinity Group Holding, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”),hereby certify as follows:

 

1.               This statement is providedpursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 in connection with the Company’sQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31,2010 (the “Periodic Report”);

 

2.               The Periodic Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) and 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

3.               The information contained inthe Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company as of dates and for theperiods indicated therein.

 

 

Date:  May 13,2010

 

 
|   | /s/ Thomas F. Wolfe       |
|--------|---------------------------|
|   | Thomas F. Wolfe           |
|   | Senior Vice President and |
|   | Chief Financial Officer   |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906,or such other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting thesignature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of thewritten statement as required by Section 906, has been provided toAffinity Group Holding, Inc. and will be retained by Affinity GroupHolding, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.

 

1

----
* 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

April 19, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-60553

Summary Calendar

KHALED MUSTAFA IZZAT HASHEM,,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

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

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A95 319 501

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

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Khaled Mustafa Izzat Hashem is a citizen and native of

Jordan who has petitioned for review of a decision by the Board

of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his request for withholding

of removal under § 241(b)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality

Act and for relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). 

By failing to brief the issue, Hashem has abandoned his claims

under the CAT. Rodriguez v. INS, 9 F.3d 408, 414 n.15 (5th Cir.

1993). 
No. 06-60553

-2-

Although our review is normally limited to decisions of the

BIA, in this case we have reviewed the findings and conclusions

of the immigration judge (IJ) because the BIA denied relief based

on the IJ’s decision. Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 903 (5th

Cir. 2002). 

Our review of the BIA’s decision is governed by the

substantial evidence standard, which requires that the BIA’s

decision be upheld unless the “evidence compels a contrary

conclusion.” Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th

Cir. 1996); see also INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84

(1992). 

Hashem argues that the IJ erred in finding that he was not a

credible witness and in holding that Hashem had failed to show

that he was likely to face persecution in Jordan due to his

membership in a particular social group and his religious

beliefs. Hashem does not challenge the IJ’s determination that

Hashem failed to show that there he could not live safely

anywhere in Jordan. 

We are not convinced that we should substitute our judgment

for the IJ’s determination that Hashem’s testimony as to past

events in Jordan and the likelihood that he would face future

persecution was not credible. Garcia-Melendez v. Ashcroft,

351 F.3d 657, 662 (5th Cir. 2003). Hashem does not allege that

he would be subject to persecution due to any protected ground. 

See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(b)(2); Ontunez-Tursios v. Ashcroft,
No. 06-60553

-3-

303 F.3d 341, 352 (5th Cir. 2002). Hashem has waived any

challenge to the IJ’s finding that he failed to show that there

is no place in Jordan where he could safely live. 8 C.F.R.

§ 1208.16(b)(3)(i); Rodriguez v. INS, 9 F.3d 408, 414 n.15

(5th Cir. 1993). 

For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is

DENIED.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1846 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1846

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            December 9, 2013

   Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To amend the Act establishing the Lower East Side Tenement National 
                 Historic Site, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Lower East Side Tenement National 
Historic Site Amendments Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS.

    Public Law 105-378 is amended--
            (1) in section 101(a)--
                    (A) in paragraph (4), by striking ``the Lower East 
                Side Tenement at 97 Orchard Street in New York City is 
                an outstanding survivor'' and inserting ``the Lower 
                East Side Tenements at 97 and 103 Orchard Street in New 
                York City are outstanding survivors''; and
                    (B) in paragraph (5), by striking ``the Lower East 
                Side Tenement is'' and inserting ``the Lower East Side 
                Tenements are'';
            (2) in section 102--
                    (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Lower East Side 
                Tenement found at 97 Orchard Street'' and inserting 
                ``Lower East Side Tenements found at 97 and 103 Orchard 
                Street''; and
                    (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``which owns and 
                operates the tenement building at 97 Orchard Street'' 
                and inserting ``which owns and operates the tenement 
                buildings at 97 and 103 Orchard Street'';
            (3) in section 103(a), by striking ``the Lower East Side 
        Tenement at 97 Orchard Street, in the City of New York, State 
        of New York, is designated'' and inserting ``the Lower East 
        Side Tenements at 97 and 103 Orchard Street, in the City of New 
        York, State of New York, are designated''; and
            (4) in section 104(d), by striking ``the property at 97 
        Orchard Street'' and inserting ``the properties at 97 and 103 
        Orchard Street''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 3, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### § 1540.3 Who may file request.

A request under this subpart may be filed by an entity, including a firm, or group or workers, trade association, or certified or recognized union which is representative of a domestic industry producing a perishable product like or directly competitive with a perishable product that such entity claims is being imported into the United States duty-free under the provisions of the Act from a beneficiary country(ies) in such increased quantities as to be a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat thereof, to such domestic industry.