alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1008.17 Conditions of disclosure. ( a ) Notwithstanding the prohibition contained in § 1008.16, the DOE may disclose records covered by this part ( 1 ) to the individual to whom the record pertains or to an agency or
( 2 ) to a person other than the individual where he has given his prior written consent to the disclosure or has made a written request for such disclosure.
( b ) Notwithstanding the prohibition contained in § 1008.16 the DOE may also disclose records covered by this part whenever the disclosure is: ( 1 ) To officers and employees of the DOE who have a need for the record in the performance of their duties;
( 2 ) Required under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552);
( 3 ) For a routine use (as defined in § 1008.2) which is described in the Federal Register notice for the system of records which the disclosure is to be made;
( 4 ) To the Bureau of the Census for purposes of planning or carrying out a census or survey or related activity pursuant to the provisions of title 13 of the United States Code;
( 5 ) To a recipient who has provided the agency with advance adequate written assurance that the record will be used solely as a statistical research or reporting record, and the record is to be transferred in a form that is not individually identifiable;
( 6 ) To the National Archives of the United States as a record which has sufficient historical or other value to warrant its continued preservation by the United States Government, or for evaluation by the Administrator of General Services or his designee to determine whether the record has such value;
( 7 ) To another agency or to an instrumentality of any governmental jurisdiction within or under the control of the United States for a civil or criminal law enforcement activity if the activity is authorized by law and if the head of the agency or instrumentality has made a written request to the DOE specifying the particular portion desired and the law enforcement activity for which the record is sought;
( 8 ) To a person pursuant to a showing of compelling circumstances affecting the health or safety of an individual if upon such disclosure notification is transmitted to the last known address of such individual;
( 9 ) To either House of Congress, or to any committee or subcommittee thereof, any joint committee of Congress or subcommittee of any such joint committee, to the extent of matter within its jurisdiction;
( 10 ) To the Comptroller General, or any of his authorized representatives, in the course of the performance of the duties of the General Accounting Office;
( 11 ) Pursuant to the order of a court of competent jurisdiction.
( c ) Notwithstanding the prohibition contained in § 1008.16 of this part, the DOE may also disclose records covered by this part when disseminating a corrected or amended record or notation of a disagreement statement as required by subsection (c)(4) of the Act.
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 356 

To direct the Secretary of the Army to convey to the Geary County Fire 

Department certain land in the State of Kansas. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 10, 2005 

Mr. BROWNBACK (for himself and Mr. ROBERTS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Army to convey to the Geary 

County Fire Department certain land in the State of Kansas. 

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 ‘‘Geary County, Kansas, 

5 Land Conveyance Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

7 In this Act: 

8 (1) FIRE DEPARTMENT.—The term ‘‘Fire De9 partment’’ means the Geary County Fire Depart10 ment, Milford, Kansas. 
2 

•S 356 IS

1 (2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

2 the Secretary of the Army. 

3 SEC. 3. CONVEYANCE OF LAND TO GEARY COUNTY FIRE 

4 DEPARTMENT, KANSAS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subsections (b), (c), 

6 and (d), the Secretary shall convey to the Fire Depart7 ment, by quitclaim deed and without consideration, all 

8 right, title, and interest of the United States in and to 

9 the parcel of land described in subsection (b)(1). 

10 (b) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.— 

11 (1) IN GENERAL.—The parcel of land referred 

12 to in subsection (a) is the approximately 7.4 acres 

13 of land under the jurisdiction of the Secretary lo14 cated in Geary County, Kansas. 

15 (2) SURVEY.—The exact acreage and a legal 

16 description of the parcel of land described in para17 graph (1) shall be determined by a survey that is 

18 satisfactory to the Secretary. 

19 (c) USE OF LAND.—The parcel of land conveyed 

20 under subsection (a) shall be used by the Fire Department 

21 for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a fire 

22 station. 

23 (d) REVERSION.—At the option of the Secretary, all 

24 right, title, and interest in and to the parcel of land con25 veyed under subsection (a) shall revert to the United 
3 

•S 356 IS

1 States, if the Secretary determines that the parcel of land 

2 is no longer— 

3 (1) held in public ownership; or 

4 (2) used for the purpose described in subsection 

5 (c). 

Æ
#### § 956.24 Qualification and acceptance.

Any person nominated to serve as a member or alternate member of the committee shall, prior to selection by the Secretary, qualify by filing a written background and acceptance statement indicating such person's willingness to serve in the position for which nominated.
*Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 95-10572

Summary Calendar

 

EMMA MAE MCDONNELL,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant-Appellee.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Texas

(7:94-CV-101)

 

January 23, 1996

Before GARWOOD, JOLLY and PARKER, Circuit Judges.*

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from the dismissal of appellant’s claims

brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). She argues that,

after she filed her workers’ compensation claim for employmentrelated physical injury pursuant to the Federal Employees’

Compensation Act (FECA), she was on that account subjected to

retaliatory employment discrimination and discharge and to
2

intentional infliction of emotional distress, during her employment

and in relation to her discharge, by the Postal Service, her former

employer. She argues that the district court erred in determining

that FECA’s exclusive remedy provision barred her claims under the

FTCA. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

We agree, generally for the reasons given in this respect by the

district court, that appellant’s FTCA claims are precluded by the

FECA and the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) as made applicable to

Postal Service employment by the Postal Reorganization Act. See

Benton v. United States, 960 F.2d 19, 21 (5th Cir. 1992); Morales

v. Dept. of the Army, 947 F.2d 766, 768-69 (5th Cir. 1991). See

also Pereira v. United States Postal Service, 964 F.2d 873, 875

(9th Cir. 1992); Saul v. United States, 928 F.2d 829 (9th Cir.

1991). We note that Lingle v. Norge Div. of Magic Chef, Inc., 486

U.S. 399 (1988), relied on by appellant, deals with wholly private

employment and does not involve the FTCA, the FECA, or the CSRA.

Similarly, in Truman v. United States, 26 F.3d 592 (5th Cir. 1994),

also relied on by appellant, the plaintiff was not a federal

employee, and the FECA and the CSRA were not involved. Postal

Service employees are federal employees and a part of the civil

service. 39 U.S.C. § 1001(b). We do not reach the discretionary

function issue.

AFFIRMED
Subpart 1407.1 - Acquisition Plans

Parent topic: PART 1407 - ACQUISITION PLANNING

1407.102 Policy.

DOI has implemented its acquisition planning system in 404 DM. This system meets the criteria

prescribed in FAR Subpart 7.1, 375 DM, OCIO Program Management, and 376 DM, Automated Data

Processing. Each of these addresses strategic planning for OCIO and planning for acquisition of

federal information processing resources.
-81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74

36 37 38 39 40 

### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 08/30 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 30 Aug 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.86 N 77.06 WMeters AGL
II 

Calendar No. 85 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 339 

To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate certain hunting and fishing 

activities. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2005 

Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. NELSON of Nebraska, 

Mr. ENSIGN, Mr. ENZI, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. HATCH, Mr. CONRAD, Mr. 

SALAZAR, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. THOMAS, and Mr. KYL) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

APRIL 21, 2005 

Reported by Mr. SPECTER, without amendment 

A BILL 

To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate certain 

hunting and fishing activities. 

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 ‘‘Reaffirmation of State 

5 Regulation of Resident and Nonresident Hunting and 

6 Fishing Act of 2005’’. 
2 

S 339 RS 

1 SEC. 2. DECLARATION OF POLICY AND CONSTRUCTION OF 

2 CONGRESSIONAL SILENCE. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—It is the policy of Congress that 

4 it is in the public interest for each State to continue to 

5 regulate the taking for any purpose of fish and wildlife 

6 within its boundaries, including by means of laws or regu7 lations that differentiate between residents and non8 residents of such State with respect to the availability of 

9 licenses or permits for taking of particular species of fish 

10 or wildlife, the kind and numbers of fish and wildlife that 

11 may be taken, or the fees charged in connection with 

12 issuance of licenses or permits for hunting or fishing. 

13 (b) CONSTRUCTION OF CONGRESSIONAL SILENCE.— 

14 Silence on the part of Congress shall not be construed to 

15 impose any barrier under clause 3 of Section 8 of Article 

16 I of the Constitution (commonly referred to as the ‘‘com17 merce clause’’) to the regulation of hunting or fishing by 

18 a State or Indian tribe. 

19 SEC. 3. LIMITATIONS. 

20 Nothing in this Act shall be construed— 

21 (1) to limit the applicability or effect of any 

22 Federal law related to the protection or management 

23 of fish or wildlife or to the regulation of commerce; 

24 (2) to limit the authority of the United States 

25 to prohibit hunting or fishing on any portion of the 

26 lands owned by the United States; or 
3 

S 339 RS 

1 (3) to abrogate, abridge, affect, modify, super2 sede or alter any treaty-reserved right or other right 

3 of any Indian tribe as recognized by any other 

4 means, including, but not limited to, agreements 

5 with the United States, Executive Orders, statutes, 

6 and judicial decrees, and by Federal law. 

7 SEC. 4. STATE DEFINED. 

8 For purposes of this Act, the term ‘‘State’’ includes 

9 the several States, the District of Columbia, the Common10 wealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, Amer11 ican Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mar12 iana Islands. 
Calendar No. 85 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 339 

A BILL 

To reaffirm the authority of States to regulate 

certain hunting and fishing activities. 

APRIL 21, 2005 

Reported without amendment
Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 66 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-00737-WKW-SRW Document 66 Filed 04/26/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### § 996.1 Act and scope.

*Act* means Public Law 107-171, or the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, enacted May 13, 2002. None of the definitions or provisions of this part shall apply to any other part or program (including, but not limited to, any program providing for payments or loans to peanut producers or other persons interested in peanuts or peanut quotas) unless explicitly adopted in such other part or program.
§ 930.52 Establishment of districts subject to volume regulations. ( a ) The districts in which handlers shall be subject to any volume regulations implemented in accordance with this part shall be those districts in which the average annual production of cherries over the prior 3 years has exceeded 6 million pounds. Handlers shall become subject to volume regulation implemented in accordance with this part in the crop year that follows any 3-year period in which the 6-million pound average production requirement is exceeded in that district.
( b ) Handlers in districts which are not subject to volume regulation would only be so regulated to the extent that they handled cherries which were grown in a district subject to regulation as specified in paragraph (a) of this section. In such a case, the handler must place in inventory reserve pursuant to § 930.55 or § 930.57 or divert pursuant to § 930.59 the required restricted percentage of the crop originating in the regulated district.
( c ) Handlers in districts not meeting the production requirement described in paragraph (a) of this section in a given year would not be subject to volume regulation in the next crop year.
( d ) Any district producing a crop which is less than 50 percent of the average annual processed production in that district in the previous five years would be exempt from any volume regulation if, in that year, a restricted percentage is established.
( e ) The Board, with the approval of the Secretary, may establish rules and regulations necessary and incidental to the administration of this section.
[61 FR 49942, Sept. 24, 1996, as amended at 67 FR 51714, Aug. 8, 2002]
#### §§ 1041.152-1041.159 [Reserved]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

GREAT SOUTHERN WOOD )

PRESERVING, INC., )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06cv708-CSC

)

AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE )

COMPANY, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

Now pending before the court is the unopposed August 30, 2006, motion for extension

of time to file a responsive pleading (doc. # 7) filed by the defendants. Upon consideration

of the motion, it is

ORDERED that the defendants are GRANTED an extension to and including

September 11, 2006, to file a responsive pleading.

Done this 31st day of August, 2006.

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00708-CSC Document 8 Filed 08/31/2006 Page 1 of 1
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

	NO. 2-05-286-CV

THOMAS HARRIS AND	APPELLANTS	

ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS								

	V.

KATHY GRIFFITH	APPELLEE

	----------

	FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW OF WISE COUNTY

	----------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

	----------

	On November 17, 2005, we notified Appellants that their brief had not been filed as required by TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a)  and stated that the appeal was subject to dismissal unless Appellants or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a motion reasonably explaining the failure to file a brief and the need for an extension.  Thereafter, we granted three extensions in response to motions for extension filed by Vicki King, pro se.  On February 28, 2006, we ordered that Appellants’ brief was due on April 14, 2006, and stated that no further extensions would be granted.  We have not received Appellants’ brief.

	Because Appellants have not filed a brief, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.  See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b).

								PER CURIAM 		

PANEL D: GARDNER, WALKER, and MCCOY, JJ.	

DELIVERED: May 11, 2006
#### § 993.51 Inspection and certification.

Each handler shall at his own expense, before or upon the receiving, and before the shipping or disposing of prunes, cause an inspection to be made of such prunes to determine whether they meet the applicable grade and size requirements or the pack specifications, including labeling, effective pursuant to this part. Such handler shall obtain a certificate that such prunes meet the aforementioned applicable requirements and shall submit such certificate, or cause it to be submitted, to the committee. Acceptable certificates shall be those issued by inspectors of the Dried Fruit Association of California. The Secretary may designate another inspection service in the event the services of the Association prove unsatisfactory.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 1996 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      6-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                       Dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                            Jun-30-1996
<CASH>                                                       18,755
<SECURITIES>                                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                77,364
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  5,000
<INVENTORY>                                                  14,983
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            119,016
<PP&E>                                                       63,868
<DEPRECIATION>                                              147,776
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                              587,863
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       179,183
<BONDS>                                                      75,750
<COMMON>                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                             0
<PREFERRED>                                                 509,250
<OTHER-SE>                                                (176,320)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                587,863
<SALES>                                                     445,457
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            445,457
<CGS>                                                        39,331
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                               454,531
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            2,462
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             (9,011)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     63
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                         (9,074)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                   0
<CHANGES>                                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                                (9,074)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                   .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                   .00
        


</TABLE>
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

RALPH WILSON LINGO, )

)

 Petitioner, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:06-CV-703-MHT

)

WILLIE R. COLLINS, et al., )

)

 Respondents. )

ORDER ON MOTION

Upon consideration of the motion for extension of time filed by the respondents on

August 31, 2006 (Court Doc. No. 8), and for good cause, it is

ORDERED that this motion be and is hereby GRANTED. It is further 

ORDERED that the respondents be GRANTED an extension from August 31, 2006

to and including September 15, 2006 to file their answer to the petition. 

Done this 5 day of September, 2006. th

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00703-MHT-CSC Document 9 Filed 09/05/2006 Page 1 of 1
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION

BRIAN BONNER, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 3:06cv715-MHT

) (WO) 

NORINCO a/k/a CHINA NORTH )

INDUSTRIES CORP., et al., )

)

Defendants. )

JUDGMENT

The court having been informed that this cause is now

settled, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the

court that this lawsuit is dismissed in its entirety with

prejudice, with the parties to bear their own costs and

with leave to the parties, within 45 days, to stipulate

to a different basis for dismissal or to stipulate to the

entry of judgment instead of dismissal, and with leave to

any party to file, within 45 days, a motion to have the

dismissal set aside and the case reinstated or the

Case 3:06-cv-00715-MHT-TFM Document 127 Filed 02/18/09 Page 1 of 2
settlement enforced, should the settlement not be

consummated.

The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this

document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant

to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

DONE, this the 18th day of February, 2009.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00715-MHT-TFM Document 127 Filed 02/18/09 Page 2 of 2
H. Res. 1087

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 5, 2006.

Resolved, That—

(1) Room H–139 of the Capitol shall be known and 

designated as the ‘‘Henry J. Hyde Room’’; and 

(2) this resolution shall take effect on the day following the date on which Henry J. Hyde is no longer 

serving as a Member of the House of Representatives. 

Attest:

Clerk.
Case 2:06-cr-00206-MHT-CSC Document 54 Filed 10/26/2006 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                              18 USC, SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In  connection  with the  quarterly  report of Alpha  Spacecom,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the six month period ended June 30, 2006, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
the  undersigned,  in the capacity  and on the date  indicated  below,  certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C./  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

     1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Rule 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.


Dated: August 18, 2006                   s/Xuedong Hu
                                         ---------------------------------------
                                         Xuedong Hu, Chief Executive Officer/CFO