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

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2458 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2458

 To terminate any Federal employee who refuses to answer questions or 
           gives false testimony in a congressional hearing.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 20, 2013

Mr. Brooks of Alabama introduced the following bill; which was referred 
          to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To terminate any Federal employee who refuses to answer questions or 
           gives false testimony in a congressional hearing.

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

SECTION 1. CAUSE FOR TERMINATION WHEN GRANTED IMMUNITY.

    Any Federal employee who refuses to answer questions in a 
congressional hearing after being granted immunity shall be terminated 
from employment.

SEC. 2. CAUSE FOR TERMINATION WITHOUT WAIVER OF IMMUNITY.

    Any Federal employee who, in a congressional hearing, refuses to 
answer questions specifically, directly, and narrowly relating to the 
official duties of such employee, without being required to waive 
immunity with respect to the use of answers or the fruits thereof in a 
criminal prosecution of such employee, shall be terminated from 
employment.

SEC. 3. FALSE TESTIMONY CAUSE FOR TERMINATION.

    If three-fourths of the congressional body to whom the testimony 
was given finds that a Federal employee willfully or knowingly gave 
false testimony in a congressional hearing, then such employee shall be 
terminated from employment.
                                 <all>
```
Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

ORRIN D. EDENFIELD,

Petitioner,

v. 4:20cv231–WS/MAF

JEFF LONG, Warden, Sterling

Correctional Facility, and ASHLEY

MOODY, Attorney General for the State

of Florida, and PHILIP WEISER,

Attorney General for the State of 

Colorado, 

Respondents.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

AMENDED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's amended report and

recommendation (ECF No. 14) docketed September 28, 2020. The magistrate

judge recommends that Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed

as untimely. Petitioner has filed objections (ECF No. 15) to the magistrate judge’s

report and recommendation.

Upon review of the record in light of Petitioner’s objections, the court has

Case 4:20-cv-00231-WS-MAF Document 16 Filed 10/13/20 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

determined that the magistrate judge's amended report and recommendation is due

to be adopted based on the untimeliness of Petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas

corpus. Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's amended report and recommendation (ECF No. 14)

is hereby ADOPTED and incorporated by reference into this order. 

2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED.

3. Petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED

as untimely.

4. The clerk shall enter judgment stating: "The petitioner's petition for writ

of habeas corpus is DISMISSED as to all Respondents."

5. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. 

6. Leave to appeal in forma pauperis is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 13th day of October , 2020.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 4:20-cv-00231-WS-MAF Document 16 Filed 10/13/20 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

Case 4:20-cv-00231-WS-MAF Document 16 Filed 10/13/20 Page 3 of 3
#### § 29.2519 Fire-cured.

Tobacco cured under artificial atmospheric conditions by the use of open fires from which the smoke and fumes of burning wood are partly absorbed by the tobacco.
#### § 29.6155 Summary of standard grades.

| Three grades of binder | Three grades of stripper |
| --- | --- |
| B1 | C1 |
| B2 | C2 |
| B3 | C3 |

| Three grades of straight stripped | Three grades of farm filler |
| --- | --- |
| X1 | Y1 |
| X2 | Y2 |
| X3 | Y3 |

| Two grades of nondescript | One grades of scrap |
| --- | --- |
| N1 | S |
| N2 | |
| | |
| --- | --- |
| Tobacco not covered by standard grades is designated as “No-G.” | |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>       5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM (A) CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT DECEMBER 31,
1997, CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE YEAR ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH (B)
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. Dollars

<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                   Jan-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                     Dec-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                            1
<CASH>                             1,282,817
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                      6,090,052
<ALLOWANCES>                         163,442
<INVENTORY>                          237,642
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   8,098,912
<PP&E>                             7,898,827
<DEPRECIATION>                     3,617,402
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    17,825,702
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>              6,116,120
<BONDS>                            2,696,020
<COMMON>                              40,965
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<OTHER-SE>                         8,356,597
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      17,825,702
<SALES>                           25,506,735
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  25,506,735
<CGS>                              4,992,025
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     16,328,746
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                   7,876,580
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   328,259
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      973,150
<INCOME-TAX>                         585,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  388,150
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                         388,150
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           0.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0.11


</TABLE>
§ 3201.140 Powder coatings. ( a ) *Definition.* Powder coatings are polymer resin systems that are combined with stabilizers, curatives, pigments, and other additives and ground into a powder. These coatings are applied electrostatically to metallic surfaces and then cured under heat. Powder coatings are typically used for coating metals, such as vehicle and bicycle parts, household appliances, and aluminum extrusions.
( b ) *Minimum biobased content.* The Federal preferred procurement product must have a minimum biobased content of at least 34 percent, which shall be based on the amount of qualifying biobased carbon in the product as a percent of the total organic carbon in the finished product.
( c ) *Preference compliance date.* No later than July 6, 2020, procuring agencies, in accordance with this part, will give a procurement preference for qualifying biobased powder coatings. By that date, Federal agencies responsible for drafting or reviewing specifications for products to be procured shall ensure that the relevant specifications require the use of biobased powder coatings.
[84 FR 32021, July 5, 2019]
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2106 

To authorize and request the President to award the Medal of Honor posthumously to First Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing for acts of valor during 

the Civil War. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 22, 2013 

Mr. KIND (for himself and Mr. SENSENBRENNER) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To authorize and request the President to award the Medal 

of Honor posthumously to First Lieutenant Alonzo H. 

Cushing for acts of valor during the Civil War. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

4 Congress makes the following findings: 

5 (1) Alonzo H. Cushing was born in Delafield, 

6 Wisconsin, on January 19, 1841. 

7 (2) Alonzo H. Cushing graduated from the 

8 United States Military Academy at West Point, New 

9 York, on June 24, 1861. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2106 IH

1 (3) On July 3, 1863, First Lieutenant Alonzo 

2 H. Cushing commanded Battery A, 4th United 

3 States Artillery, Army of the Potomac, in the de4 fense of the ‘‘Angle’’ on Cemetery Ridge during the 

5 Battle of Gettysburg. 

6 (4) During the battle, First Lieutenant Alonzo 

7 H. Cushing was shot multiple times, but refused to 

8 retreat. 

9 (5) First Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing contin10 ued to command his battery until he was shot and 

11 killed. 

12 (6) The Union victory at the Battle of Gettys13 burg was one of the key turning points in the Civil 

14 War. 

15 (7) The Secretary of the Army and the Sec16 retary of Defense have determined that the actions 

17 of First Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing do merit the 

18 award of the Medal of Honor. 

19 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR AWARD OF THE MEDAL OF 

20 HONOR TO FIRST LIEUTENANT ALONZO H. 

21 CUSHING FOR ACTS OF VALOR DURING THE 

22 CIVIL WAR. 

23 (a) AUTHORIZATION.—Notwithstanding the time lim24 itations specified in section 3744 of title 10, United States 

25 Code, or any other time limitation with respect to the 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2106 IH

1 awarding of certain medals to persons who served in the 

2 Armed Forces, the President is authorized and requested 

3 to award the Medal of Honor under section 3741 of such 

4 title to then First Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing for con5 spicuous acts of gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of 

6 life and beyond the call of duty in the Civil War, as de7 scribed in subsection (b). 

8 (b) ACTS OF VALOR DESCRIBED.—The acts of valor 

9 referred to in subsection (a) are the actions of then First 

10 Lieutenant Alonzo H. Cushing while in command of Bat11 tery A, 4th United States Artillery, Army of the Potomac, 

12 at Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, on July 3, 1863, during the 

13 American Civil War. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
§ 322.2 General requirements for interstate movement and importation. ( a ) *Interstate movement.* ( 1 ) The following regions of the United States are considered pest-free areas for Varroa mite, tracheal mite, small hive beetle, and African honeybee: Hawaii.
( 2 ) In order to prevent the introduction of Varroa mite, tracheal mite, small hive beetle, and African honeybee into the pest-free areas listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, interstate movement of honeybees into those areas is prohibited.
( b ) *Importation.* In order to prevent the introduction into the United States of bee diseases and parasites, and undesirable species and subspecies of honeybees: ( 1 ) You may import bees, honeybee germ plasm, and beekeeping byproducts into the United States only in accordance with this part.
( 2 ) You may not import pollen derived from bee colonies and intended for use as bee feed into the United States.
( 3 ) ( i ) You may not import used beekeeping equipment into the United States, unless that used beekeeping equipment either: ( A ) Will be used solely for indoor display purposes and will not come into contact with indigenous bees; or
( B ) Consists of bee boards that contain live brood of bees, other than honeybees, from a region listed in § 322.4(c).
( ii ) New, unused beekeeping equipment is eligible for importation into the United States if it complies with all applicable regulations in this chapter.
( c ) *Movements not in compliance.* ( 1 ) Any honeybees, honeybee germ plasm, bees other than honeybees, beekeeping byproducts, or used beekeeping equipment not in compliance with this part that are imported into the United States will be either: ( i ) Immediately exported from the United States by you at your expense; or
( ii ) Destroyed by us at your expense.
( 2 ) Pending exportation or destruction, we will immediately apply any necessary safeguards to the bees, beekeeping byproducts, or used beekeeping equipment to prevent the introduction of bee diseases and parasites, and undesirable species and subspecies of honeybees into the United States.
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

147) ll-K- (B) -146 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:53 AM Sheet 147 of 325 
P.2 

' t . ••• 

E> A-83-27 ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, INC. 

1 II-K-(B^l<+6 

i 

July 19, 1984 

Mr. Robert Short 

Economic Analysis Branch 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Mail Drop-12 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Subject: EPA Contract No. 68-02-3564, Work Assignment #17 

Revised Industrial Natural Gas Price Projections 

Dear Robert: 

We have revised our forecast of industrial natural gas prices for 

the "higher oil and gas prices" scenario. The attached table presents 

the revised forecast and replaces Table C-6 in "Regional Projections of 

Industrial Fuel Prices," dated July 13, 1984. 

Sincerely, 

Tim Hogan U 

TH/ce 

Enclosure 

cc: Dr. A. Wehe 

Economic s / Engineerin g 
TABLE C-6. PROJECTIONS OF INDUSTRIAL 

NATURAL GAS PRICES3 

(1982 $/MMBtu) 

P.3 

Region 1985 1990 1995 2000 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

New England 

New York/New Jersey 

Middle Atlantic 

South Atlantic 

Midwest 

Southwest 

Central 

North Central 

West 

Northwest 

4.43 

4.35 

4.29 

4.61 

4.42 

4.05 

3.91 

3.72 

4.04 

4.21 

5.39 

5.38 

5.36 

5.66 

5.51 

5.15 

5.09 

4.58 

5.03 

5.10 

7.37 

7.36 

7.36 

7.31 

7.44 

6.71 

6.53 

5.79 

6.49 

6.38 

8.58 

8.57 

8.57 

8.49 

8.67 

8.02 

7.75 

6.89 

7.61 

7.28 

Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc. Higher oil and gas prices 

scenario.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 24.6

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

         KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby
constitutes and appoints each of Beverly L. Brown, Robert K. Kretzman, Lawrence
E. Kreider and Joram C. Salig or any of them, each acting alone, his true and
lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution, for him and
his name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, in connection with the
THE COSMETIC CENTER, INC. (the "Corporation") Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 27, 1997 (the "Form 10-K") under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including, without limiting the generality of
the foregoing, to sign the Form 10-K in the name and on behalf of the
Corporation or on behalf of the undersigned as a director or officer of the
Corporation, and any amendments to the Form 10-K and any instrument, contract,
document or other writing, of or in connection with the Form 10-K or amendments
thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents
in connection therewith, including this power of attorney, with the Securities
and Exchange Commission and any applicable securities exchange or securities
self-regulatory body, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each
acting alone, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and
thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to
all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying
and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone,
or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed these presents this 17
day of March, 1998.

                             /s/ RICHARD E. HALPERIN
                             ---------------------------------
                             RICHARD E. HALPERIN
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; Large-Scale Collaborative Projects Awards.                    

*Date:*                         December 6-7, 2010.                    

*Time:*                         10 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                        National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN-12, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Hybrid Meeting)                    

*Contact Person:*                         Arthur L. Zachary, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Natcher Building, Room 3AN12, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-2886,                         *zacharya@nigms.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

      ( print page 70015)    
Dated: November 9, 2010.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-28849 Filed 11-15-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
IIB 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2289 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 26, 2013 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

AN ACT 

To rename section 219(c) of the Internal Revenue Code 

of 1986 as the Kay Bailey Hutchison Spousal IRA. 

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


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2289 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON SPOUSAL IRA. 

2 The heading of subsection (c) of section 219 of the 

3 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 

4 ‘‘SPECIAL RULES FOR CERTAIN MARRIED INDIVIDUALS’’ 

5 and inserting ‘‘KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON SPOUSAL IRA’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 25, 2013. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 17

- 13183 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:12

- cr - 20914

- WPD

- 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus CHUCK WAYNE BOYD, a.k.a. Dred, a.k.a. Jamaican, a.k.a. Bumble Bee, Defendan t

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

________________________ ( January 26, 2018 ) Before WILSON , WILLIA M PRYOR, and ANDERSON , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Case: 17-13183 Date Filed: 01/26/2018 Page: 1 of 32 Chuck Wayne Boyd appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his secon d motion to reduce his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) , the district court’s denial of his Federal Rule of Civil Proce dure 60(b) motion, and the district court’s denial of his motion for reconsideration. Boyd bases his appeal on Amendment 782 to the United States Sentencing Guidel ines

. He argues that he was eligible for a sentence reduction under Amendment 782, that he improperly received a criminal history category of VI, and that his 300

- month sentence created a sentencing disparity and therefore violated 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Pleadings dr afted pro se “are held to a less stringent standard than pleadings drafted by attorneys and will, therefore, be liberally construed.” Tannenbaum v. United States , 148 F.3d 1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998) (per curiam). However, a pro se appellant still abando ns an issue when he fails to offer argument on the issue in his brief. Timson v. Sampson , 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam)

. Boyd’s pro se brief does not mention the denial of his Rule 60(b) motion or the denial of his motion for reconsidera tion and thus he has abandoned any arguments as to those aspects of his appeal

. Id

. As to Boyd’s motion to reduce his sentence, t he district court did not err by denying his motion because we have previously affirmed the district court’s first denial of his motion to reduce his sentence based on Amendment 782 and he has not demonstrated a ny exceptions to the law

- of

- the

- case doctrine. See United States v. Boyd , No. 15

- 13154 (1 1th Cir. Case: 17-13183 Date Filed: 01/26/2018 Page: 2 of 33 December 3, 2015 ) (per curiam) (unpublished order ) ; United States v. Tamayo , 80 F.3d 1514, 1520 (11th Cir. 1996) (explaining that u nd er the law

- of

- the

- case doctrine “[a]n appellate decision binds all subsequent proceedings in the same case not only as to explicit rulings, but also as to issues decided necessarily by implica tion on the prior appeal ” ). Accordingly, we affirm. AFFIRMED. Case: 17-13183 Date Filed: 01/26/2018 Page: 3 of 3