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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 161 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                        March 16, 2005.
    Resolved, That the following named Member be and is hereby elected to the 
following standing committee of the House of Representatives:
            (1) Committee on rules.--Ms. Matsui.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 32

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 32 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 32.24 Same: Table of organ doses.

| Part of body | Column I (rem) | Column II (rem) | Column III (rem) | Column IV (rem) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Whole body; head and trunk: active blood-forming organs; gonads: or lens of eye | 0.001 | 0.01 | 0.5 | 15 |
| Hands and forearms; feet and ankles; localized areas of skin averaged over areas no larger than 1 square centimeter | 0.015 | 0.15 | 7.5 | 200 |
| Other organs | 0.003 | 0.03 | 1.5 | 50 |

[34 FR 9329, June 13, 1969]
§ 205.385 Clarification or reconsideration. ( a ) Any entity subject to an emergency order may request clarification or reconsideration of the emergency order. All such requests must be submitted in writing to the Secretary. The Department will post all such requests on the DOE website consistent with 10 CFR part 1004. To the extent the ordered entity believes the grid security emergency order lacks necessary clarity for implementation, or conflicts with the technically feasible operations of the electric grid or existing regulatory requirements, the ordered entity should seek immediate clarification from the Department.
( b ) Upon receipt of a request for clarification or reconsideration, the Secretary may, in his or her sole discretion, order a stay of the emergency order for which such clarification or rehearing is sought. The Secretary will act as soon as practicable on each request, with or without further proceedings. Such responsive actions may include granting or denying the request or abrogating or modifying the order, in whole or in part.
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION

WILLIE MCNAIR, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, ) 

 ) 

v. ) No. 2:06-cv-00695-WKW-CSC 

 ) 

RICHARD ALLEN, Commissioner, ) 

Alabama Department of ) 

Corrections, et al., ) 

 ) 

 Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs. ) 

__________________________________ 

JAMES CALLAHAN, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, ) 

 ) 

v. ) No. 2:06-cv-00919-WKW-CSC 

 ) 

RICHARD ALLEN, et al., ) 

 ) 

 Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs. ) 

DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF FILING

 Defendants Richard Allen, Commissioner, and Grantt Culliver, Warden, give 

notice of filing the attached correspondence dated this same date from Governor Bob 

Riley to Commissioner Richard Allen, concerning the execution of Thomas Arthur. 

Defendants make this filing immediately upon receipt to bring it to the Court’s attention, 

and reserve the right to comment further upon the matter as may be appropriate. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

TROY KING (KIN047) 

ATTORNEY GENERAL 

BY: 

Case 2:06-cv-00695-WKW-CSC Document 124 Filed 09/27/2007 Page 1 of 3
 2 

s/ James W. Davis 

James W. Davis (DAV103)

Assistant Attorney General 

J. Clayton Crenshaw (CRE007)

Assistant Attorney General 

OF COUNSEL: 

Office of the Attorney General 

11 South Union Street 

Montgomery, AL 36130 

(334) 242-7300 

(334) 353-8440 Fax 

Email: ccrenshaw@ago.state.al.us 

jimdavis@ago.state.al.us 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that on the 27th day of September, 2007, a copy of the foregoing 

has been electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, 

which will electronically send a copy of the same to the following: 

Randall S. Susskind 

Cathleen I. Price 

Equal Justice Initiative of Alabama 

122 Commerce Street 

Montgomery, AL 36104 

cprice@eji.org

rsusskind@eji.org

Vincent R. Fitzpatrick, Jr. (SDNY Bar No. VF2907) 

Heather K. Mcdevitt (SDNY Bar No. HM9973) 

Stephanie Cohen (SDNY Bar No. SM7006) 

White & Case LLP 

1155 Avenue of the Americas 

New York, NY 10036 

Telephone: (212) 819-8200 

Facsimile: (212) 354-8113 

vfitzpatrick@whitecase.com

hmcdevitt@whitecase.com

stephcohen@whitecase.com

Case 2:06-cv-00695-WKW-CSC Document 124 Filed 09/27/2007 Page 2 of 3
 3 

OF COUNSEL 

S/ James W. Davis 

James W. Davis (DAV103)

Assistant Attorney General 

Office of the Attorney General 

11 South Union Street 

Montgomery, AL 36130 

(334) 242-7300 

(334) 353-8440 Fax 

Email: jimdavis@ago.state.al.us 

Case 2:06-cv-00695-WKW-CSC Document 124 Filed 09/27/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00695-WKW-CSC Document 124-2 Filed 09/27/2007 Page 1 of 1
IV 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 350

Expressing appreciation to the people and Government of Canada for their 

long history of friendship and cooperation with the people and Government of the United States and congratulating Canada as it celebrates 

‘‘Canada Day’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 30, 2005

Mr. STUPAK (for himself, Mr. SWEENEY, Mr. BASS, Mr. MCNULTY, Mr. 

SMITH of Washington, Mr. DINGELL, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. 

MICHAUD, Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota, and Mr. KILDEE) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations 

RESOLUTION

Expressing appreciation to the people and Government of 

Canada for their long history of friendship and cooperation with the people and Government of the United 

States and congratulating Canada as it celebrates ‘‘Canada Day’’.

Whereas the United States has a long-cherished economic, social, and political partnership with Canada; 

Whereas the United States and Canada share not only a 

5,500 mile border, but also common ideals and cultural 

affinities; 
2

•HRES 350 IH 

Whereas in this era of heightened security, the United States 

and Canada have renewed cooperative efforts to safeguard the movement of people and goods, improve information-sharing, and strengthen border infrastructure and 

technology; and 

Whereas July 1st of each year is officially celebrated in Canada as ‘‘Canada Day’’ in recognition of the anniversary 

of the establishment of the union of the British North 

American provinces in a federation called Canada: Now, 

therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

2 (1) expresses its appreciation to the people and 

3 Government of Canada for their long history of 

4 friendship and cooperation with the people and Gov5 ernment of the United States; and 

6 (2) congratulates Canada as it celebrates its an7 nual ‘‘Canada Day’’.

Æ
###### Editorial Note on Part 32

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 32 appear at 79 FR 75739, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 32.2 Definitions.

As used in this part:

*Committed dose* for the purposes of this part means the radiation dose that will accumulate over time as a result of retention in the body of radioactive material. Committed dose is a generic term for internal dose and must be calculated by summing the projected dose over the 50 years after intake for all irradiated organs or tissues multiplying the doses to individual organs and tissues by applicable tissue weighting factors.

*Dose commitment* means the total radiation dose to a part of the body that will result from retention in the body of radioactive material. For purposes of estimating the dose commitment, it is assumed that from the time of intake the period of exposure to retained material will not exceed 50 years.

*Lot Tolerance Percent Defective* means, expressed in percent defective, the poorest quality in an individual inspection lot that should be accepted.

*Nationally tracked source* is a sealed source containing a quantity equal to or greater than Category 1 or Category 2 levels of any radioactive material listed in Appendix E to part 20 of this Chapter. In this context a sealed source is defined as radioactive material that is sealed in a capsule or closely bonded, in a solid form and which is not exempt from regulatory control. It does not mean material encapsulated solely for disposal, or nuclear material contained in any fuel assembly, subassembly, fuel rod, or fuel pellet. Category 1 nationally tracked sources are those containing radioactive material at a quantity equal to or greater than the Category 1 threshold. Category 2 nationally tracked sources are those containing radioactive material at a quantity equal to or greater than the Category 2 threshold but less than the Category 1 threshold.

*Sealed Source and Device Registry* means the national registry that contains all the registration certificates, generated by both the NRC and the Agreement States, that summarize the radiation safety information for the sealed sources and devices and describe the licensing and use conditions approved for the product.

[34 FR 6653, Apr. 18, 1969, as amended at 39 FR 22129, June 20, 1974; 71 FR 65708, Nov. 8, 2006; 77 FR 43690, July 25, 2012]
Case 2:06-cv-00719-WKW-WC Document 15 Filed 08/29/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00719-WKW-WC Document 15 Filed 08/29/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00719-WKW-WC Document 15 Filed 08/29/2007 Page 3 of 3
#### BOSIA v. PITTSBURGH CONTRACTING CO.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

December 24, 1914.)

Action by Carolina Bosia, as administratrix, against the Pittsburgh Contracting Company.

No opinion. Motion denied, with $10 costs. Order filed. See, also, 150 k Y. Supp. 1077.
§ 20.1208 Dose equivalent to an embryo/fetus. ( a ) The licensee shall ensure that the dose equivalent to the embryo/fetus during the entire pregnancy, due to the occupational exposure of a declared pregnant woman, does not exceed 0.5 rem (5 mSv). (For recordkeeping requirements, see § 20.2106.)
( b ) The licensee shall make efforts to avoid substantial variation above a uniform monthly exposure rate to a declared pregnant woman so as to satisfy the limit in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) The dose equivalent to the embryo/fetus is the sum of— ( 1 ) The deep-dose equivalent to the declared pregnant woman; and
( 2 ) The dose equivalent to the embryo/fetus resulting from radionuclides in the embryo/fetus and radionuclides in the declared pregnant woman.
( d ) If the dose equivalent to the embryo/fetus is found to have exceeded 0.5 rem (5 mSv), or is within 0.05 rem (0.5 mSv) of this dose, by the time the woman declares the pregnancy to the licensee, the licensee shall be deemed to be in compliance with paragraph (a) of this section if the additional dose equivalent to the embryo/fetus does not exceed 0.05 rem (0.5 mSv) during the remainder of the pregnancy.
[56 FR 23396, May 21, 1991, as amended at 63 FR 39482, July 23, 1998]
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------



                   Certification of Periodic Financial Report
                   ------------------------------------------

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, Andrew E. Kersey, the President and
Chief Executive Officer, and Jeffery A. Baird, the Chief Financial Officer of
CAS Medical Systems, Inc. (the "issuer"), do hereby certify that the report on
Form 10-Q accompanying this certification (the "report") fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the issuer.



/s/ Andrew E. Kersey
-------------------------------------
Andrew E. Kersey
President and Chief Executive Officer
CAS Medical Systems, Inc.

November 6, 2008






/s/ Jeffery A. Baird
-------------------------------------
Jeffery A. Baird
Chief Financial Officer
CAS Medical Systems, Inc.

November 6, 2008
IV 

House Calendar No. 30 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 241 

[Report No. 109–59] 

Providing for the adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 240) amending the 

Rules of the House of Representatives to reinstate certain provisions 

of the rules relating to procedures of the Committee on Standards of 

Official Conduct to the form in which those provisions existed at the 

close of the 108th Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2005 

Mr. DREIER, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; 

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for the adoption of the resolution (H. Res. 240) 

amending the Rules of the House of Representatives 

to reinstate certain provisions of the rules relating to 

procedures of the Committee on Standards of Official 

Conduct to the form in which those provisions existed 

at the close of the 108th Congress. 

1 Resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution, House 

2 Resolution 240 is hereby adopted. 
House Calendar No. 30 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 241 

[Report No. 109–59] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for the adoption of the resolution (H. 

108th Congress. which those provisions existed at the close of the on Standards of Official Conduct to the form in the rules relating to procedures of the Committee Representatives to reinstate certain provisions of Res. 240) amending the Rules of the House of 

APRIL 27, 2005 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed
Editorial Note on Part 26
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 26 appear at 87 FR 71455, Nov. 22, 2022.

§ 26.127 Procedures. ( a ) Licensee testing facilities shall develop, implement, and maintain clear and well-documented procedures for accession, shipment, and testing of urine specimens.
( b ) Written chain of custody procedures must describe the methods to be used to maintain control and accountability of specimens from receipt through completion of testing and reporting of results, during storage and shipping to the HHS-certified laboratory, and continuing until final disposition of the specimens.
( c ) Licensee testing facilities shall develop, implement, and maintain written standard operating procedures for each assay performed for drug and specimen validity testing. If a licensee testing facility performs validity screening tests, the licensee testing facility shall develop, implement, and maintain written standard operating procedures for each test. The procedures must include, but are not limited to, detailed descriptions of— ( 1 ) The principles of each test;
( 2 ) Preparation of reagents, standards, and controls;
( 3 ) Calibration procedures;
( 4 ) Derivation of results;
( 5 ) Linearity of the methods;
( 6 ) Sensitivity of the methods;
( 7 ) Cutoff values;
( 8 ) Mechanisms for reporting results;
( 9 ) Controls;
( 10 ) Criteria for unacceptable specimens and results;
( 11 ) Reagents and expiration dates; and
( 12 ) References.
( d ) Licensee testing facilities shall develop, implement, and maintain written procedures for instrument and test setup and normal operation, including the following: ( 1 ) A schedule for checking critical operating characteristics for all instruments and validity screening tests;
( 2 ) Tolerance limits for acceptable function checks; and
( 3 ) Instructions for major troubleshooting and repair.
( e ) Licensee testing facilities shall develop, implement, and maintain written procedures for remedial actions to be taken when systems, and instrumented and non-instrumented tests are out of acceptable limits or errors are detected. Each facility shall maintain documentation that these procedures are followed and that all necessary corrective actions are taken. In addition, each facility shall have systems in place to verify all stages of testing and reporting and to document the verification.
§ 217.53 Types of allocation orders. There are three types of allocation orders available for communicating allocation actions. These are: ( a ) *Set-aside:* an official action that requires a person to reserve materials, services, or facilities capacity in anticipation of the receipt of rated orders;
( b ) *Directive:* an official action that requires a person to take or refrain from taking certain actions in accordance with its provisions. For example, a directive can require a person to: stop or reduce production of an item; prohibit the use of selected materials, services, or facilities; or divert the use of materials, services, or facilities from one purpose to another; and
( c ) *Allotment:* an official action that specifies the maximum quantity of a material, service, or facility authorized for a specific use.
#### § 987.78 Separability.

If any provision of this part is declared invalid, or the applicability thereof to any person, circumstance, or thing is held invalid, the validity of the remainder of this part or the applicability of this part to any other person, circumstance, or thing shall not be affected thereby.
314.407-4 Mistakes after award.       (c) The HCA has the authority to make administrative determinations in connection with alleged post-award mistakes.    **Parent topic:** Subpart 314.4 - Opening of Bids and Award of Contract
# Subpart 1844.2—Consent to Subcontracts

**Parent topic:**PART 1844—SUBCONTRACTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

## 1844.204 Contract clauses.

## 1844.204-70 NASA contract clause.

The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.244–70, Geographic Participation in the Aerospace Program, in all research and development solicitations and contracts of $500,000 or over that will be performed within the United States.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

October 26, 2010 

s1018 

Order 

 

October 26, 2010 

141321 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 141321 

 COA: 290493 

 Oakland CC: 2008-218993-FC 

LEONARD BERTRUM CARTER, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 18, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

EASTERN DIVISION 

ANGELA PRICE, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

ROANOKE CITY BOARD OF 

EDUCATION, 

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NUMBER: 

3:06-cv-742-MEF 

DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO SHOW CAUSE

TO

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND/CORRECT BRIEF

Comes now the Defendant to respond to the Order of this Court dated 

August 31, 2007 to show cause why Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend/Correct Brief 

should not be granted; and in support thereof states: 

1. Defendant does not know of legal grounds why Plaintiff’s 

motion should not be granted. 

 s/Donald B. Sweeney, Jr. 

Donald B. Sweeney, Jr. (SWE002) 

Case 3:06-cv-00742-MEF-WC Document 30 Filed 09/05/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

OF COUNSEL

Bradley Arant Rose & White LLP

One Federal Place 

1819 Fifth Avenue North 

Birmingham, AL 35203-2104 

Telephone: (205) 521-8000 

Facsimile: (205) 521-8800 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 5, 2007, I electronically filed the 

foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send 

notification of such filing to the following: 

Adam M. Porter, Esq. 

2301 Morris Avenue, Suite 102 

Birmingham, AL 35203 

and I hereby certify that I have mailed by United States Postal Service the 

document to the following non-CM/ECF participants: 

None 

Respectfully submitted, 

s/ Donald B. Sweeney, Jr. 

Donald B. Sweeney, Jr. (asb-3803-277d)

Bradley Arant Rose & White LLP

One Federal Place 

1819 Fifth Avenue North 

Birmingham, AL 35203-2104 

Telephone: (205) 521-8000 

Facsimile: (205) 521-8800 

E-mail: dsweeney@bradleyarant.com 

Case 3:06-cv-00742-MEF-WC Document 30 Filed 09/05/2007 Page 2 of 2
Motion Denied as Moot; Order issued October 6, 2011 Withdrawn, and Order filed

October 7, 2011.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-11-00437-CR

____________

LASHAWN MONIQUE DARNELL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 & Probate Court

Brazoria County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 178818

ORDER

The State filed a motion requesting supplementation of the record in this case. On 

October 6, 2011, the court granted the motion and issued an order for the Brazoria County 

District Clerk to file the original of State’s Exhibit 1, a surveillance video, on or before 

October 28, 2011. The original of State’s Exhibit 1 was included with the clerk’s record 

that was filed with this court on May 19, 2011. Accordingly, we issue the following order.
2

This court’s order of October 6, 2011, granting the State’s motion to supplement the 

record with the original of State’s Exhibit 1 is WITHDRAWN, and the State’s motion is 

DENIED AS MOOT.

PER CURIAM
909.507-2 Contract clause.

(a)

(1) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 952.209-72, Organizational Conflicts of Interest,

in each solicitation and contract for advisory and assistance services expected to exceed the

simplified acquisition threshold.

(2) Contracting officers may make appropriate modifications where necessary to address the

potential for organizational conflicts of interest in individual contracts. Contracting officers shall

determine the appropriate term of the bar of paragraph (b)(1)

(i) of the clause at 952.209-72 and enter that term in the blank provided. In the usual case of a

contract for advisory and assistance services a period of three, four, or five years is appropriate;

however, in individual cases the contracting officer may insert a term of greater or lesser duration.

(3) The contracting officer shall include Alternate I with the clause in instances in which a

meaningful amount of subcontracting for advisory and assistance services is expected.

(b) Contracts, which are not subject to part 970 but provide for the operation of a DOE site or facility

or environmental remediation of a specific DOE site or sites, shall contain the organizational conflict

of interest clause at 952.209-72. The organizational conflicts of interest clause in such contracts

shall include Alternate I to that clause.

Parent topic: Subpart 909.5 - Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest
# SUBPART 27.1 – GENERAL

*(Revised September 19, 2016 through PROCLTR 2016-09)*

**Parent topic:**PART 27 – PATENTS, DATA, AND COPYRIGHTS

## 27.101 Applicability.

Refer all patent, copyright, rights in data, and trademark matters through the Office of Counsel to DLA General Counsel.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

ALMA T. McBROOM, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. ) CASE NO. 2:06-cv-767-MEF

)

VANESSA GORDON, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

Upon consideration of the defendants' Motion to Dismiss Without Prejudice (Doc.

#63) filed on April 20, 2007, it is hereby ORDERED:

1. That the defendants shall file a brief in support of the motion which contains

proper citations to legal authority for the relief requested on or before May 4, 2007.

2. The plaintiff shall file a response to the motion which shall include a brief and any

evidentiary materials on or before May 14, 2007. 

DONE this the 24th day of April, 2007.

 /s/ Mark E. Fuller 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00767-MEF-SRW Document 64 Filed 04/24/2007 Page 1 of 1
#### § 36.35 Source rack protection.

If the product to be irradiated moves on a product conveyor system, the source rack and the mechanism that moves the rack must be protected by a barrier or guides to prevent products and product carriers from hitting or touching the rack or mechanism.