alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 440.11 Native Americans. ( a ) Notwithstanding any other provision of this part, the Support Office Director may determine, after taking into account the amount of funds made available to a State to carry out the purposes of this part, that: ( 1 ) The low-income members of an Indian tribe are not receiving benefits under this part equivalent to the assistance provided to other low-income persons in the State under this part and
( 2 ) The low-income members of such tribe would be better served by means of a grant made directly to provide such assistance.
( b ) In any State for which the Support Office Director shall have made the determination referred to in paragraph (a) of this section, the Support Office Director shall reserve from the sums that would otherwise be allocated to the State under this part not less than 100 percent, or more than 150 percent, of an amount which bears the same ratio to the State's allocation for the fiscal year involved as the population of all low-income Native Americans for whom a determination under paragraph (a) of this section has been made bears to the population of all low-income persons in the State.
( c ) The Support Office Director shall make the determination prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section in the event a State: ( 1 ) Does not apply within the sixty-day time period prescribed in § 440.12(a);
( 2 ) Recommends that direct grants be made for low-income members of an Indian tribe as provided in § 440.12(b)(5);
( 3 ) Files an application which DOE determines, in accordance with the procedures in § 440.30, not to make adequate provision for the low-income members of an Indian tribe residing in the State; or
( 4 ) Has received grant funds and DOE determines, in accordance with the procedures in § 440.30, that the State has failed to implement the procedures required by § 440.16(6).
( d ) Any sums reserved by the Support Office Director pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section shall be granted to the tribal organization serving the individuals for whom the determination has been made, or where there is no tribal organization, to such other entity as the Support Office Director determines is able to provide adequate weatherization assistance pursuant to this part. Where the Support Office Director intends to make a grant to an organization to perform services benefiting more than one Indian tribe, the approval of each Indian tribe shall be a prerequisite for the issuance of a notice of grant award.
( e ) Within 30 days after the Support Office Director has reserved funds pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section, the Support Office Director shall give written notice to the tribal organization or other qualified entity of the amount of funds reserved and its eligibility to apply therefor.
( f ) Such tribal organization or other qualified entity shall thereafter be treated as a unit of general purpose local government eligible to apply for funds hereunder, pursuant to the provisions of § 440.13.
[49 FR 3629, Jan. 27, 1984, as amended at 58 FR 12529, Mar. 4, 1993]
#### Joan S. Keller, as Administratrix of the Estate of Robert M. Krinner, Deceased, Respondent, v Thomas J. Finnerty et al., Appellants.

In a negligence action to recover damages for wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated December 7, 1979, which granted plaintiffs motion to vacate the dismissal of this action pursuant to CPLR 3404 and to restore the action to the Trial Calendar. Order reversed, on the law, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements payable jointly to defendants appearing separately *636and filing separate briefs, and plaintiffs motion is denied. It was an improvident exercise of discretion to vacate the automatic dismissal which had been entered pursuant to CPLR 3404. Plaintiff failed to make the requisite showing of facts sufficient to excuse her delay in prosecution. After the case was marked "off’ the calendar on February 27, 1978, due to the nonappearance of plaintiffs counsel, no activity can be shown in this action. Counsel’s unfamiliarity with court rules is law office failure which is not a reasonable excuse for delay (see *Mclntire Assoc. v Glens Falls Ins. Co.,*41 AD2d 692). The interval of 21 months between the default and the instant motion is sufficient to require denial of the motion since no legitimate excuse for the neglect exists. Damiani, J. P., Lazer, Mangano and Cohalan, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 4.1  


[FORM
OF FACE OF CERTIFICATE] 


EL
BANCO FINANCIAL CORPORATION 


INCORPORATED
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA

AUTHORIZED 100,000,000 SHARES COMMON STOCK ($.01 PAR VALUE PER SHARE) 


This
is to certify that                          is the owner of
                         fully paid and non-assessable shares of the above
Corporation transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder thereof in person or by a duly authorized Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed. 


        Witness,
the seal of the Corporation and the Signatures of its duly authorized officers. 


        Dated
this                          day of
                        , 20        . 



      




	
 CHAIRMAN / CEO	 	
 SECRETARY





       









[FORM
OF BACK OF CERTIFICATE] 


        The
following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or
regulations. 



	TEN COM	 	—as tenants in common	 	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT—	 	 	 	Custodian
	 	 	 	 	 	 	
	 	 	 	 
	TEN ENT	 	—as tenants by the entireties	 	 	 	 	 	        (Cust)    (Minor)
	JT TEN	 	—as joint tenants with right of	 	 	 	under Uniform Gifts to Minors
	 	 	survivorship and not as tenants in common	 	Act        	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	
	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	        (State)





Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 


For
value received,
                                         
        hereby sell, assign and transfer unto 


PLEASE
INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER
                                         
       

IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE 



	

	

 PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS OF ASSIGNEE
	


	







                                        
        
Shares represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and
appoint                                        
          Attorney
to transfer the said shares on the books of the within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. 



Dated,
                                         
        


In
presence of
                                         
        


NOTICE:
THE SIGNATURE TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT, OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1148 

Expressing support for the goals and ideas of ‘‘Stomach Cancer Awareness 

Month’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 15, 2018 

Mrs. BROOKS of Indiana (for herself, Mr. BANKS of Indiana, Mr. BUCSHON, 

Mr. CARSON of Indiana, Mr. HOLLINGSWORTH, Mr. ROKITA, Mr. VISCLOSKY, Mrs. WALORSKI, and Mr. MESSER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the goals and ideas of ‘‘Stomach 

Cancer Awareness Month’’. 

Whereas stomach cancer, also known as gastric cancer, is one 

of the most difficult cancers to detect in the early stages 

of the disease, which contributes to high mortality rates 

and human suffering; 

Whereas stomach cancer occurs when cancer cells develop in 

the lining of the stomach; 

Whereas stomach cancer is the fifth most common type of 

cancer worldwide; 

Whereas, in 2018— 

(1) an estimated 26,240 cases of stomach cancer 

were diagnosed in the United States; and 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1148 IH 

(2) it was estimated that 10,800 people in the 

United States would die from stomach cancer; 

Whereas the estimated 5-year survival rate for stomach cancer is only 31 percent; 

Whereas approximately 1 in 111 individuals will be diagnosed 

with stomach cancer during their lifetimes; 

Whereas, in the United States, stomach cancer is more prevalent among racial and ethnic minorities; 

Whereas more education for patients and health care providers is needed for the timely recognition of stomach 

cancer symptoms; 

Whereas more research into effective early diagnosis, screening, and treatment for stomach cancer is needed; and 

Whereas November 2018 is an appropriate month to observe 

‘‘Stomach Cancer Awareness Month’’: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideas of ‘‘Stomach 

3 Cancer Awareness Month’’; 

4 (2) supports efforts to educate the people of the 

5 United States about stomach cancer; 

6 (3) recognizes the need for additional research 

7 into early diagnosis and treatment for stomach can8 cer; and 

9 (4) encourages the people of the United States, 

10 interested groups, and affected persons to— 

11 (A) promote awareness of stomach cancer 

12 and foster understanding of the impact of stomVerDate Sep 11 2014 20:44 Nov 15, 2018 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR1148.IH HR1148

pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 1148 IH 

1 ach cancer on patients, their families, and care2 givers; 

3 (B) take an active role in the fight to end 

4 stomach cancer; and 

5 (C) observe Stomach Cancer Awareness 

6 Month with appropriate ceremonies and activi7 ties to promote public awareness of, and poten8 tial treatments for, stomach cancer. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
# EUR-Lex - 31987R4069 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31987R4069

**Council Regulation (EEC) No 4069/87 of 22 December 1987 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1981/82 drawing up the list of Community regions, in which production aid for hops is granted only to recognized producer groups **

*
Official Journal L 380 , 31/12/1987 P. 0032 - 0032 Finnish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 25 P. 0225 Swedish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 25 P. 0225 *

*****

COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 4069/87

of 22 December 1987

amending Regulation (EEC) No 1981/82 drawing up the list of Community regions, in which production aid for hops is granted only to recognized producer groups

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71 of 26 July 1971 on the common organization of the market in hops (1), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3800/85 (2), and in particular Article 12 (4) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas Article 12 (3) of Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71 provides for the granting of production aid to producers' groups in regions of the Community where the said groups are capable of ensuring that their members receive a fair income and of achieving rational management of supply; whereas those regions are listed in the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1981/82 (3);

Whereas scrutiny of the data supplied by Belgium shows that the conditions laid down in Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71 are fulfilled by a new region; whereas Regulation (EEC) No 1981/82 should therefore be amended as from the 1987 harvest,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The region 'Belgium' is hereby added to the list set out in the Annex to Regulation (EEC) No 1981/82.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

It shall apply as from the 1987 harvest.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 22 December 1987.

For the Council

The President

N. WILHJELM

(1) OJ No L 175, 4. 8. 1971, p. 1.

(2) OJ No L 367, 31. 12. 1985, p. 32.

(3) OJ No L 215, 23. 7. 1982, p. 3.
[No. 9675.

Department Two.

October 17, 1911.]

#### Mike Hadzla, *Appellant,*v. Northern Pacific Railway Company, *Respondent.*
      *1*

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Pierce county, Easterday, J., entered December 29, 1910.

Affirmed.

*Louis I. Lefebvre,*for appellant.

*Geo. T. Reid, J. W. Quick,*and *L. B. da Ponte,*for respondent.

Reported in 118 Pac. 212.

Per Curiam.

— The statement of facts having heretofore been stricken in this case, and the appeal not raising any issues which are not involved in the statement of facts, the judgment will be affirmed.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Pro-Flight Aviation, Inc., 

Docket No. 16-15-03 Complainants 

V. 

City of Renton 

Respondent 

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME 

This matter is before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) based on the abovereferenced complaint, filed in accordance with FAA Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted 

Airport Enforcement Proceedings, 14 CFR, Part 16. Pursuant to 14 CFR Part 16, subpart B, 

the date by which the Director's Determination will be issued in this matter is hereby 

extended to August 25, 2016. 

An extension oftime is necessary and appropriate for a fair and complete determination in this 

case. 

7 6 ATE 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on May 10,2016, I caused to be emailed and placed in the 

United States mail (first class, postage paid) or personally delivered a true copy ofthe 

foregoing ORDER addressed to: 

Counsel for Complainant 

Benjamin H. Klein 

Law offices of Paul A. Lange, LLC 

80 Ferry Boulevard 

Stratford, CT 06615 

bhk@lopal.com 

Counsel for Respondent 

Zan etta L. Fontes 

Senior Assistant City Attorney 

City of Renton 

1055 South Grady Way 

Renton, W A 98057 

zfontes@rentonwa.gov 

Hand-Delivered to: 

FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket (AGC-600) 

FAA Office of Airport Compliance and Management Analysis (AC0-1 00) 

(]{M · 

Claudia Roberts 

Office of Airport Compliance 

and Management Analysis
### Overview of the U.S. Geological Survey Chesapeake Bay Ecosystem Program

By: Scott PhillipsBill Caughron

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/fs12497

#### Links

- More information:  **USGS Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract
#### § 850.22 Permissible exposure limit.

The responsible employer must assure that no worker is exposed to an airborne concentration of beryllium greater than the permissible exposure limit established in 29 CFR 1910.1000, as measured in the worker's breathing zone by personal monitoring, or a more stringent TWA PEL that may be promulgated by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration as a health standard.
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 753 

Encouraging people in the United States to recognize March 2, 2018, as 

Read Across America Day. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 27, 2018 

Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois (for himself, Mrs. DAVIS of California, and Mr. 

KHANNA) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

RESOLUTION 

Encouraging people in the United States to recognize March 

2, 2018, as Read Across America Day. 

Whereas reading is a basic requirement for quality education 

and professional success, and is a source of pleasure 

throughout life; 

Whereas the people of the United States must be able to read 

if the United States is to remain competitive in the global 

economy; 

Whereas Congress has placed great emphasis on reading 

intervention and providing additional resources for reading assistance, including through the programs authorized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 

1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) and through annual appropriations for library and literacy programs; and 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 753 IH 

Whereas more than 50 national organizations concerned 

about reading and education have joined with the National Education Association (NEA) to use March 2nd to 

celebrate reading and all authors who ignite a love of 

reading: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) honors all authors for their success in en3 couraging children to discover the joy of reading, in4 cluding authors like Theodor Geisel (also known as 

5 ‘‘Dr. Seuss’’), and Patricia McKissack; 

6 (2) honors the 21st anniversary of Read Across 

7 America Day; 

8 (3) encourages parents, educators, and commu9 nities to read with their children for at least 30 min10 utes on Read Across America Day in honor of the 

11 commitment of the House of Representatives to 

12 building a Nation of readers; and 

13 (4) encourages the people of the United States 

14 to observe Read Across America Day with appro15 priate ceremonies and activities. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7360

RICARDO EVANS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

INDIAN CREEK CORRECTIONAL CENTER, an Institution; A. HINES, Correctional Officer; B.

FLOYD, Investigating Correctional Officer,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District

Judge. (CA-98-812-AM)

Submitted: February 10, 2000 Decided: February 15, 2000

Before WIDENER and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ricardo Evans, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the order from which Evans appeals was filed on

October 13, 1998, it was entered on the district court’s docket

sheet on October 14, 1998. October 14, 1998, is therefore the

effective date of the district court’s decision. See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 58 and 79(a); see also Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35

(4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Richardo Evans seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 1999) complaint without

prejudice for Evans’ failure to pay the partial filing fee in accordance with the court’s order. We dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction because Evans’ notice of appeal was not timely filed.

Parties are accorded thirty days after entry of the district

court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, see Fed. R. App.

P. 4(b)(1), unless the district court extends the appeal period

under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and

jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 434

U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S.

220, 229 (1960)).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on

October 14, 1998.* Evans’ notice of appeal was filed on October 5,

1999. Because Evans failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to

obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss

the appeal and deny Evans’ motion for appointment of counsel as

moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
§ 603.875 Foreign access to technology and U.S. competitiveness provisions. ( a ) Consistent with the objective of enhancing national security and United States competitiveness by increasing the public's reliance on the United States commercial technology, the contracting officer must include provisions in a TIA that addresses foreign access to technology developed under the TIA.
( b ) A provision must provide, as a minimum, that any transfer of the technology must be consistent with the U.S. export laws, regulations and the Department of Commerce Export Regulation at Chapter VII, Subchapter C, Title 15 of the CFR (15 CFR parts 730-774), as applicable.
( c ) A provision should also provide that any products embodying, or produced through the use of, any created intellectual property, will be manufactured substantially in the United States, and that any transfer of the right to use or sell the products must, unless the Government grants a waiver, require that the products will be manufactured substantially in the United States. In individual cases, the contracting officer, with the approval of the program official and intellectual property counsel, may waive or modify the requirement of substantial manufacture in the United States at the time of award, or subsequent thereto, upon a showing by the recipient that: ( 1 ) Alternative benefits are being secured for the United States taxpayer (*e.g.*, increased domestic jobs notwithstanding foreign manufacture);
( 2 ) Reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to transfer the technology under similar terms to those likely to manufacture substantially in the United States; or
( 3 ) Under the circumstances domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible.
Order entered October 21, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00562-CR

TODD ALLEN REICH, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 199th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 199-80306-2013

ORDER

On August 15, 2014, the Court granted court reporter Janet Dugger a sixty-day extension 

of time to file the reporter’s record. To date, the record has not been filed.

Accordingly, we ORDER the trial court to make findings of fact regarding why the 

reporter’s record has not been filed.

 The trial court shall first determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If 

the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute the appeal, it shall 

make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, it shall next 

determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs 

for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the 

trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial 

court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective 

representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds 
appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the 

appeal.

 The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who 

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay 

in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can 

be filed. 

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a record, containing the written findings of fact, 

any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY DAYS of the date 

of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. The appeal 

shall be reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the findings are received, 

whichever is earlier.

/s/ ADA BROWN

JUSTICE