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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2226 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2226

 To provide for the liquidation or reliquidation of entries of certain 
                        manufacturing equipment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 30, 2006

  Mr. DeMint introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for the liquidation or reliquidation of entries of certain 
                        manufacturing equipment.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENT ENTERED ON OR AFTER OCTOBER 
              21, 1998, AND BEFORE JULY 10, 1999.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding sections 514 and 520 of the Tariff 
Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514 and 1520) or any other provision of law, 
not later than 90 days after the receipt of the request described in 
subsection (b), any article--
            (1) that was entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
        consumption--
                    (A) on or after October 21, 1998; and
                    (B) before July 10, 1999; and
            (2) with respect to which heading 9902.84.81, 9902.84.83, 
        9902.84.85, 9902.84.87 (as in effect on December 31, 2001), 
        9902.84.89, or 9902.84.91 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
        the United States would have applied if such article had been 
        entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on 
        December 31, 2001,
shall be liquidated or reliquidated as if heading 9902.84.81, 
9902.84.83, 9902.84.85, 9902.84.87 (as in effect on December 31, 2001), 
9902.84.89, or 9902.84.91, whichever is applicable, applied to such 
entry or withdrawal, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall refund any 
excess duty paid with respect to such entry.
    (b) Requests.--Liquidation or reliquidation may be made under 
subsection (a) with respect to any entry only if a request therefor is 
filed with the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection of the 
Department of Homeland Security, not later than 180 days after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, that contains sufficient information to 
enable the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection--
            (1) to locate the entry; or
            (2) to reconstruct the entry if it cannot be located.
                                 <all>
```
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>CONSENT FOR 10-K</TITLE>
</HEAD>

<BODY>


<H1 ALIGN=CENTER><FONT SIZE=3>CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTANTS</FONT></H1>

<H2 ALIGN=LEFT><FONT SIZE=3>Board of Directors</FONT></H2>
<H2 ALIGN=LEFT><FONT SIZE=3>Theragenics Corporation</FONT></H2>

<P><FONT SIZE=3>We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our
reports dated January 14, 2000, appearing in your Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 1999, in the Company’s Registration Statements
on Form S-8, file numbers 333-15313, 333-40737, 333-40653, and 333-64801. </FONT></P>

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
<P>___________________

    GRANT THORNTON LLP

<H2 ALIGN=LEFT><FONT SIZE=3>Atlanta, Georgia <BR>March 24, 2000</FONT></H2>

</BODY>
</HTML>
#### Office of Disciplinary Counsel *v.*Jefferson.

[Cite as *Disciplinary Counsel v. Jefferson*(1998), 83 Ohio St.3d 317.]

(No. 98-757

Submitted June 10, 1998

Decided September 30, 1998.)

*318
      *Jonathan E. Coughlan,*Disciplinary Counsel, for relator.

*Per Curiam.*

We adopt the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the board. Absent any mitigating circumstances, the penalty for ignoring orders of the court and continuing to practice law while under suspension is disbarment. *Disciplinary Counsel v. Chavers*(1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 441, 687 N.E.2d 415, and cases cited therein. Respondent is hereby permanently disbarred from the practice of law in Ohio. Costs taxed to respondent.

*Judgment accordingly.*

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
#### § 29.3559 Type 36.

That type of air-cured tobacco commonly known as Green River, Green River Air-cured, or Dark Air-cured of the Henderson and Owensboro Districts, and produced principally in the Green River section of Kentucky.

[30 FR 9207, July 23, 1965. Redesignated at 49 FR 16759, Apr. 20, 1984]
#### In the Matter of Scot A. Pike, Petitioner, v Thomas A. Coughlin, III, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Correctional Services, et al., Respondents.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered in Sullivan County) to review a determination of the Department of Correctional Services. Petitioner is an inmate of the Woodbourne Correctional Facility. On December 31, 1979, an inmate misbehavior report was filed which charged him with possession of a pipe containing residue which was tested and found to be marihuana. The pipe was found in petitioner’s bedding by a correction officer searching petitioner’s cell. Concededly, petitioner was not present at the time of the search. A notice and assistance form was filed by a correction counselor and a superintendent’s proceeding was held. Petitioner denied the charge and contended, in substance, that the pipe was put in his bedding by someone else. After the hearing, petitioner was found guilty of the charge and sentenced to 30 days in keep lock with no pay or phone calls and 30 days loss of good behavior allowance. Thereafter, the instant article 78 proceeding was commenced. Petitioner contends that the finding is against the weight of the evidence, that he was deprived of due process of law, and that the punishment imposed was excessive. We disagree and would sustain the determination made. A correction officer stated that he found the pipe in the back side of the bed under the bedding and he doubted that it could have been thrown in the window and landed there. While the proof demonstrated that petitioner’s cell was unlocked for periods of time during the day, we are of the view that questions of credibility were raised *938and that ample evidence supports the determination of petitioner’s guilt and, therefore, it should not be disturbed (see *Matter of Baker v Wilmot,*65 AD2d 884). Considering the record in its entirety, we are of the view that petitioner suffered no deprivation of due process. Specifically, petitioner was not entitled to have the assisting employee present at the hearing nor did the referee abuse his discretion in denying petitioner’s request for a second adjournment. Furthermore, a full-scale adversary hearing including confrontation, cross-examination and counsel is not required *(Matter of Gunn v Ward,*71 AD2d 856). We have also considered all of petitioner’s other arguments pertaining to this contention of lack of due process and find them unpersuasive. Finally, we reject petitioner’s contention that the punishment was excessive. Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Casey and Herlihy, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32

Certification of CEO and CFO 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 BlackRock Kelso Capital
Corporation (the Company) for the quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), James R. Maher, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Frank D.
Gordon, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 results of operations of the Company.



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|       |  | /s/ James R. Maher     
|Name:  |  | James R. Maher         
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
|Date:  |  | May 12, 2008           
|       | 
|       |  | /s/ Frank D. Gordon    
|Name:  |  | Frank D. Gordon        
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
|Date:  |  | May 12, 2008
4.607 Solicitation provisions and contract clause.       (a)                    						            Insert the provision at 52.204-5, Women-Owned Business (Other Than Small Business), in all solicitations that-                                                         (1)                          								                Are not set aside for small business concerns;                                                            (2)                          								                Exceed the simplified acquisition threshold; and                                                            (3)                          								                Are for contracts that will be performed in the United States or its outlying areas.                                                                             (b)                    						            Insert the provision at 52.204-6, Unique Entity Identifier, in solicitations that do not contain the provision at 52.204-7, System for Award Management, or meet a condition at 4.605(c)(2).                                          (c)                    						            Insert the clause at 52.204-12, Unique Entity Identifier Maintenance, in solicitations and resulting contracts that contain the provision at 52.204-6, Unique Entity Identifier.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 4.6 - Contract Reporting
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-11204

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ERIC HERNANDEZ-PUENTES, also known as Eddy Hernandez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:09-CR-49-1

Before KING, DEMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges

PER CURIAM:

*

Eric Hernandez-Puentes (Hernandez) appeals his sentence of 30 months

of imprisonment, following his guilty plea conviction to illegal reentry into the

United States. He argues, as he did in the district court, that the sentence,

which exceeded the advisory guidelines range, is substantively unreasonable.

Sentences are reviewed for reasonableness by engaging in a bifurcated

review. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); United States v.

Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). Hernandez does not argue

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

August 26, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 09-11204 Document: 00511216251 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/26/2010
No. 09-11204

that the district court committed any procedural error; thus, we need only review

the substantive reasonableness of his sentence. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.

Hernandez argues that his above-guidelines sentence is substantively

unreasonable because the advisory guidelines range adequately accounted for

his prior criminal history, including the nature and recency of his past crimes.

The Supreme Court, however, has “implicitly rejected the position that no

additional weight could be given to factors included in calculating the applicable

advisory Guidelines range, since to do otherwise would essentially render the

Guidelines mandatory.” United States v. Williams, 517 F.3d 801, 809 (5th Cir.

2008). Moreover, the district court’s oral and written reasons reflect that the

court considered the guidelines; the policy statements; and the 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a) factors, including the nature and circumstances of the offense of

conviction, Hernandez’s history and characteristics, and the need for the

sentence to provide adequate deterrence and to protect the public from further

criminal conduct by Hernandez. The district court noted that Hernandez’s

criminal history reflected several crimes which were not included in the

guidelines calculations and which, as a whole, reflected that Hernandez had a

lack of respect for the law.

In sum, the district court did not abuse its discretion. The sentence

imposed “was reasonable under the totality of the relevant statutory factors”.

United States v. Brantley, 537 F.3d 347, 349 (5th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation

omitted); see also United States v. Lopez-Velasquez, 526 F.3d 804, 807 (5th Cir.

2008) (upholding an upward variance based on the nature and characteristics

of the defendant and his criminal history).

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 09-11204 Document: 00511216251 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/26/2010
# 3.906           Contract clause.       

             The *contracting officer**shall* insert the clause at 52.203-17, Contractor Employee Whistleblower Rights, in all *solicitations* and contracts, except *solicitations* and contracts of DoD, NASA, the Coast Guard, or applicable elements of the intelligence community (see 3.900(a)).          

**Parent topic:**Subpart 3.9 - Whistleblower Protections for Contractor Employees
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2583 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2583

 To reauthorize the matching grant program for school security in the 
          Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 28, 2013

Mr. Barrow of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To reauthorize the matching grant program for school security in the 
          Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968.

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

SECTION 1. MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM FOR SCHOOL SECURITY.

    Part AA of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets 
Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3797a et seq.) is amended--
            (1) in section 2701--
                    (A) in subsection (a), by striking ``and other 
                deterrent measures'' and inserting ``, other deterrent 
                measures, and emergency notification and response 
                technologies''; and
                    (B) in subsection (b)--
                            (i) by redesignating paragraph (5) as 
                        paragraph (6); and
                            (ii) by inserting after paragraph (4) the 
                        following:
            ``(5) Acquisition and installation of technology for 
        expedited notification of local law enforcement during an 
        emergency.''; and
            (2) in section 2705, by striking ``2001 through 2009'' and 
        inserting ``2014 through 2018''.
                                 <all>
```
#### McEVOY, Respondent, v. SOCIÉTÉ ANONYME, etc., Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 12, 1906.)

Action by William J. McEvoy against the Soeiété Anonyme, etc. F. Seymour, for appellant R. Franklin, for respondent.

No opin*1128ton. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Order filed.
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 Cancer Institute Initial Review Group, Subcommittee J—Population and Patient-Oriented Training.                    

*Date:*                         February 24, 2011.                    

*Time:*                         7:45 a.m. to 6 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Westin Alexandria, 400 Courthouse Square, Alexandria, VA 22314.                    

*Contact Person:*                         ILDA M. Mckenna, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Research Training Review Branch, Division of Extramural Activities, National Cancer Institute, 6116 Executive Boulevard, Room 8111, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-7481,                         *mckennai@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.392, Cancer Construction; 93.393, Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: November 16, 2010.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-29362 Filed 11-19-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2292 

To provide relief for the Federal judiciary from excessive rent charges. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 15, 2006 

Mr. SPECTER (for himself, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. CHAMBLISS, and 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To provide relief for the Federal judiciary from excessive 

rent charges. 

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

3 SECTION 1. RELIEF FROM EXCESSIVE RENT CHARGES. 

4 Section 462 of title 28, United States Code, is 

5 amended by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(g) Effective October 1, 2006, rent charges estab7 lished by the Administrator of General Services for accom8 modations provided to the judicial branch shall not exceed 

9 the actual costs of operating and maintaining such accom10 modations by the General Services Administration, and no 
2 

•S 2292 IS

1 amounts for shell rent, capital costs, real estate taxes (ex2 cept for taxes actually paid by the Administrator of Gen3 eral Services to lessors), or administrative fees shall be 

4 included in such rent charges. The judicial branch’s repay5 ment to the Administrator of General Services of the cost 

6 of repair and alteration projects performed by the General 

7 Services Administration on judicial branch accommoda8 tions after October 1, 2006, shall be recovered over time 

9 in a manner agreed upon by the Director of the Adminis10 trative Office of the United States Courts and the Admin11 istrator.’’. 

Æ
Exhibit 11.1

ML Macadamia Orchards, L.P.  Computation of Net Income (Loss) per Class A Unit(in thousands, except per unit data)

2001

2000

1999Net income (loss)

$
1,010

$
(398
)
$
4,645Class A Unitholders (ownership percentage)


× 99
%

× 99
%

× 99
%Net income (loss) allocable to Class A Unitholders

$
1,000

$
(394
)
$
4,599Class A Units outstanding


7,500


7,500


7,500Net income (loss) per Class A Unit

$
0.13

$
(0.05
)
$
0.61


---

QuickLinks
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 Homeland Security

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection

# AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice of accreditation and approval of Inspectorate America Corporation, as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, Inspectorate America Corporation, 3306 Loop 197 North, Texas City, TX 77590, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to                         *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov.*                         Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.                         *http://cbp.gov/​xp/​cgov/​import/​operations_​support/​labs_​scientific_​svcs/​commercial_​gaugers/​.*

# DATES:

The accreditation and approval of Inspectorate America Corporation, as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on March 30, 2010. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for March 2013.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anthony Malana, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060.

Dated: November 8, 2010.

Ira S. Reese,

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services. 

[FR Doc. 2010-29181 Filed 11-18-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P