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 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:*                         Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, Member Conflict: Bioengineering Sciences and Technologies.                    

*Date:*                         December 15-16, 2010.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892. (Virtual Meeting.)                    

*Contact Person:*                         Amy L Rubinstein, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Rm 5152 MSC 7844, Bethesda, MD 20892. 301-435-1159.                         *rubinsteinal@csr.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: November 19, 2010.

Jennifer S. Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-29749 Filed 11-24-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### In the Matter of *the*Claim of Philomena Natoli, Appellant. Martin P. Catherwood, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

Herlihy, J.

Appeal by the claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which found claimant ineligible for benefits effective May 9, 1966. The determination affirmed was that the claimant was not available for employment since her efforts did not indicate an active search for work and she was restricting herself to a certain area. The Referee found that “ claimant’s efforts to find work were meager and failed to demonstrate that she had a genuine attachment to the labor market.” The board adopted the Referee’s findings. The question of whether or not one has made adequate efforts to secure employment is one of fact for the board, necessarily to be determined by a hindsighted evaluation of a claimant’s performance. *(Matter of Herman*[Catherwood], 25 A D 2d 473; *Matter of Schmidt*[Catherwood], 25 A D 2d 705.) “ The question of availability has been resolved against the claimant and, since the record sustains this finding, we may not disturb the board’s determination.” *(Matter of Petrossi*[Catherwood], 24 A D 2d 782, 783.) Decision affirmed, without costs. *973Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Herlihy, J.
§ 3560.252 Authorized rental subsidies. ( a ) *General.* The purpose of rental subsidies is to reduce amounts paid by tenants for rent. Rental subsidies equal the difference between the approved shelter costs and tenant contributions as calculated in accordance with § 3560.203(a)(1).
( b ) *Forms of rental subsidies.* Rental subsidies may be in the form of: ( 1 ) Agency rental assistance;
( 2 ) Agency housing vouchers;
( 3 ) HUD section 8 assistance, including project-based and vouchers;
( 4 ) Private rental subsidies; or
( 5 ) State or local government rental subsidies.
( c ) *Multiple rent subsidies.* ( 1 ) Multiple types of rent subsidies may be used in the same MFH project.
( 2 ) Tenants with subsidies from sources other than the Agency may be eligible for Agency rental assistance if all the following conditions are met. ( i ) The tenant qualifies for Agency rental assistance.
( ii ) The rental subsidy the tenant is receiving is not a HUD voucher.
( iii ) The rental subsidy being received by the tenant is less than the full amount of Agency rental assistance for which the tenant would qualify. In such cases, the Agency may provide the difference between the subsidy received by the tenant and the amount of Agency rental assistance for which the tenant qualifies.
( d ) *Agency rental assistance (RA).* Agency RA is obligated to MFH projects on a rental unit basis. The obligation is composed of a number of rental units and associated dollar amounts of RA specified in a RA agreement with a borrower. The following types of Agency RA may be obligated to a housing project. ( 1 ) *Renewal units.* RA may be assigned to a housing project to replace existing rental unit obligations because funds associated with the units have been fully disbursed.
( 2 ) *New construction units.* RA may be provided in conjunction with initial Agency loans for construction or substantial rehabilitation of MFH projects.
( 3 ) *Servicing units.* Additional RA may be provided to operational MFH projects as a part of the Agency's general loan servicing or preservation activities.
[69 FR 69106, Nov. 26, 2004, as amended at 87 FR 11283, Mar. 1, 2022]
EXHIBIT
      32.2





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





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his
      knowledge, the annual report on Form 10-K (the “Report”) of ANTs software inc.,
      a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), for the period ended December 31, 2006:





1.  Fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




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





This
      certification is being provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be
      deemed a part of this Report, nor is it to be deemed to be “filed” for any
      purpose whatsoever.





Date: March
      15,
      2007





/s/
                Kenneth RuotoloKenneth
                Ruotolo, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary


A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company, and will be retained by the
      Company, and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon
      request.
SCEC-22-0000682

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAIʻI

________________________________________________________________

JAMES RYAN MALISH and KARL O. DICKS, Plaintiffs,

vs.

SCOTT NAGO, acting in official capacity of Chief Election 

Officer, STATE OF HAWAIʻI OFFICE OF ELECTIONS, 

and ELECTIONS COMMISSION, Defendants.

________________________________________________________________

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)

Upon consideration of Plaintiffs’ motion for 

reconsideration of this court’s November 14, 2022 order 

dismissing complaint in part, and the record, this court has not 

overlooked or misapprehended points of law or fact. See Hawaiʻi 

Rules of Appellate Procedure Rule 40(b). Accordingly, it is 

ordered that the motion is denied. 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, November 22, 2022.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

/s/ Todd W. Eddins

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCEC-22-0000682

22-NOV-2022

08:01 AM

Dkt. 14 ODMR
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

THOMAS GONZALEZ,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:20cv38–WS/MJF

JUNIOR BARRETT,

Defendant.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF

No. 3) docketed January 24, 2020. The magistrate judge recommends that this

action be transferred to the Middle District of Florida.

The court having reviewed the matter, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (ECF No. 3) is adopted

and incorporated by reference in this order of the court.
Page 2 of 2

2. The clerk shall TRANSFER this action to the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division, for all further proceedings.

DONE AND ORDERED this 18th day of February , 2020.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 246 

To repeal the sunset of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation 

Act of 2001 with respect to the expansion of the adoption credit and 

adoption assistance programs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 1, 2005 

Mr. BUNNING (for himself, Mr. NELSON of Nebraska, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. 

CRAIG, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. 

COLEMAN, and Mr. DOMENICI) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL

To repeal the sunset of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief 

Reconciliation Act of 2001 with respect to the expansion 

of the adoption credit and adoption assistance programs.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as ‘‘The Adoption Tax Relief 

5 Guarantee Act’’. 
2

S 246 IS

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF APPLICABILITY OF SUNSET OF THE 

2 ECONOMIC GROWTH AND TAX RELIEF REC3 ONCILIATION ACT OF 2001 WITH RESPECT TO 

4 ADOPTION CREDIT AND ADOPTION ASSIST5 ANCE PROGRAMS. 

6 Section 901 of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief 

7 Reconciliation Act of 2001 is amended by adding at the 

8 end the following new subsection: 

9 ‘‘(c) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to 

10 the amendments made by section 202 (relating to expan11 sion of adoption credit and adoption assistance pro12 grams).’’.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 255 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.255

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen

                                 An Act

 
   To amend certain definitions contained in the Provo River Project 
 Transfer Act for purposes of clarifying certain property descriptions, 
                         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. CLARIFYING CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONS IN PROVO RIVER 
PROJECT TRANSFER ACT.
    (a) Pleasant Grove Property.--Section 2(4)(A) of the Provo River 
Project Transfer Act (Public Law 108-382; 118 Stat. 2212) is amended by 
striking ``of enactment of this Act'' and inserting ``on which the 
parcel is conveyed under section 3(a)(2)''.
    (b) Provo Reservoir Canal.--Section 2(5) of the Provo River Project 
Transfer Act (Public Law 108-382; 118 Stat. 2212) is amended--
        (1) by striking ``canal, and any associated land, rights-of-
    way, and facilities'' and inserting ``water conveyance facility 
    historically known as the Provo Reservoir Canal and all associated 
    bridges, fixtures, structures, facilities, lands, interests in 
    land, and rights-of-way held,'';
        (2) by inserting ``and forebay'' after ``Diversion Dam'';
        (3) by inserting ``near the Jordan Narrows to the point where 
    water is discharged to the Welby-Jacob Canal and the Utah Lake 
    Distributing Canal'' after ``Penstock''; and
        (4) by striking ``of enactment of this Act'' and inserting ``on 
    which the Provo Reservoir Canal is conveyed under section 
    3(a)(1)''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
June 24, 1015 

Mr. Scott Morton 

23806 SE 33rd Street 

Issaquah, WA 98029 

Dear Mr. Morton: 

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Can Not Process Your Request 

We entered your June 5, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-2146), but 

we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply 

with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, 

you must send us all of the following: 

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief. 

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole. 

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption. 

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request. 
2 

What You Should Do 

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 

If We Do Not Hear From You 

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 1350of Chapter 63**

**of Title 18 of the United StatesCode**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of PharmAthene, Inc. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Charles A. ReinhartIII, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, thatto the best of my knowledge:

 
| 1.     |   | The Report fully  complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of  the Securities Exchange Act                              |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                   |
| 2.     |   | The information  contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the  financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |

 
| /s/ Charles A. Reinhart  III |   |
|------------------------------|--------|
| **Charles  A. Reinhart III** |   |
| **Chief  Financial Officer** |   |
| November 13, 2009       |   |

 

----
3.405 Misrepresentations or violations of the

Covenant Against Contingent Fees.

(a) Government personnel who suspect or have evidence of attempted or actual exercise of improper

influence, misrepresentation of a contingent fee arrangement, or other violation of the Covenant

Against Contingent Fees shall report the matter promptly to the contracting officer or appropriate

higher authority in accordance with agency procedures.

(b) When there is specific evidence or other reasonable basis to suspect one or more of the violations

in paragraph (a) of this section, the chief of the contracting office shall review the facts and, if

appropriate, take or direct one or more of the following, or other, actions:

(1) If before award, reject the bid or proposal.

(2) If after award, enforce the Government’s right to annul the contract or to recover the fee.

(3) Initiate suspension or debarment action under subpart 9.4.

(4) Refer suspected fraudulent or criminal matters to the Department of Justice, as prescribed in

agency regulations.

Parent topic: Subpart 3.4 - Contingent Fees
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JOHN COULTER,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 4:20-cv-193-AW-MAF

U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER 

PROTECTION,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

John Coulter filed a Bivens action against the United States Customs and 

Border Protection. According to the complaint, Customs wrongfully took Mr. 

Coulter’s boat.

Customs moved to dismiss, arguing that as a government agency, it is not 

subject to any Bivens suit. Thus, it argues, the court should dismiss for lack of 

subject-matter jurisdiction. The magistrate judge issued a report and 

recommendation, which likewise concluded the court lacks subject-matter 

jurisdiction. ECF No. 21. Mr. Coulter has not filed any objection.

As the magistrate judge correctly noted, a Bivens claim may not be brought 

against federal agencies. F.D.I.C. v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 486 (1994); McCollum v. 

Bolger, 794 F.2d 602, 608 (11th Cir. 1986). And as a federal agency, the defendant 

has sovereign immunity. Meyer, 510 U.S. at 475 (“Absent a waiver, sovereign 

Case 4:20-cv-00193-AW-MAF Document 22 Filed 03/08/21 Page 1 of 2
2

immunity shields the Federal Government and its agencies from suit.”). Thus, 

because “[s]overeign immunity is jurisdictional in nature,” id., the case must be 

dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. McCollum, 794 F.2d at 607-08 (affirming 

dismissal of “Bivens-type claim [against USPS] for lack of subject matter 

jurisdiction”); Hallett v. Ohio, 711 F. App’x 949, 951 (11th Cir. 2017) (“The district 

court did not err in dismissing Hallett’s complaint for lack of subject matter 

jurisdiction. Although Hallett alleged that jurisdiction was proper under Bivens, he 

failed to name any federal official as a defendant.”); Nalls v. Coleman Low Fed. 

Inst., 307 F. App’x 296, 298 (11th Cir. 2009) (“As an initial matter, the district court 

lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Nalls’s claims against the Bureau of Prisons 

because Bivens does not extend to federal agencies.”).

It is now ORDERED:

1. The Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 21) is adopted and 

incorporated into this order.

2. The motion to dismiss (ECF No. 19) is GRANTED.

3. The clerk will enter a judgment that says “This case is dismissed for 

lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.”

4. The clerk will close the file.

SO ORDERED on March 8, 2021. 

s/ Allen Winsor

United States District Judge

Case 4:20-cv-00193-AW-MAF Document 22 Filed 03/08/21 Page 2 of 2
FHLMC Loan No. 940972379

**GUARANTY**

**MULTISTATE**

**(for use in all jurisdictions except California)**

**REVISION DATE 05/06/05**

 

This Guaranty ("**Guaranty**") is entered into to be effective as of October 4, 2006, by the undersigned person(s) (the "**Guarantor**" jointly and severally if more than one), for the benefit of NorthMarq Capital, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (the "**Lender**").

 

RECITALS

 

A.****       Cascade Joint Venture, L.P., a Kansas limited partnership (the “**Borrower**”) has requested that Lender make a loan to Borrower in the amount of $2,540,000.00 (the "**Loan**"). The Loan will be evidenced by a Multifamily Note from Borrower to Lender dated effective as of the effective date of this Guaranty (the "**Note**"). The Note will be secured by a Multifamily Mortgage, Assignment of Rents and Security Agreement dated effective as of the effective date of the Note (the "**Security   Instrument**"), encumbering the **Mortgaged Property** described in

the Security Instrument.

 

B.        As a condition to making the Loan to Borrower, Lender requires that the Guarantor execute this Guaranty.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in order to induce Lender to make the Loan to Borrower, and in consideration thereof, Guarantor agrees as follows: 

 

| 1. | **Defined Terms.**"**Indebtedness,**"****"**Loan Documents**" and "**Property Jurisdiction**" and other capitalized terms used but not defined in this Guaranty shall have the meanings assigned to them in the Security Instrument. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

| 2. | **Scope of Guaranty.** |
|----|------------------------|

 

|   | (a) | Guarantor hereby absolutely, unconditionally and irrevocably guarantees to Lender: |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | (i) | the full and prompt payment when due, whether at the Maturity Date or earlier, by reason of acceleration or otherwise, and at all times thereafter, of each of the following: |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | (A) | a portion of the Indebtedness equal to zero percent (0%) of the original principal balance of the Note (the "Base Guaranty"); and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | (B) | in addition to the Base Guaranty, all other amounts for which Borrower is personally liable under Sections 9(c), 9(d) and 9(f) of the Note; and |
|--------|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

----