alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 182.400 What are my responsibilities as an agency awarding official? As a Federal agency awarding official, you must obtain each recipient's agreement, as a condition of the award, to comply with the requirements in— ( a ) Subpart B of this part, if the recipient is not an individual; or
( b ) Subpart C of this part, if the recipient is an individual.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-4567

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

RAYNARD ALLEN JENKINS, a/k/a Nard, a/k/a Hemi, a/k/a News,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. 

(4:13-cr-00446-RBH-1)

Submitted: March 30, 2015 Decided: April 9, 2015

Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joshua Snow Kendrick, KENDRICK & LEONARD, P.C., Greenville, 

South Carolina, for Appellant. Alfred William Walker Bethea, 

Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Raynard Allen Jenkins appeals his conviction and 170-month 

sentence imposed by the district court after he pled guilty to 

conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to 

distribute 280 grams or more of cocaine base, 500 grams or more 

of cocaine, and a quantity of marijuana, all in violation of 21 

U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846 (2012). Jenkins’ counsel has 

filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 

(1967), stating that he has found no meritorious grounds for 

appeal but raising as potential issues the adequacy of the plea 

hearing and the reasonableness of Jenkins’ sentence. Although 

informed of his right to do so, Jenkins has not filed a pro se 

supplemental brief. We affirm.

Having reviewed the transcript of the plea colloquy for 

plain error, we conclude that the district court substantially 

complied with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, and that 

the court’s failure to inform Jenkins of the potential 

immigration consequences of his plea did not affect his

substantial rights. See Henderson v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 

1121, 1126-27 (2013) (providing standard); see also United 

States v. Davila, 133 S. Ct. 2139, 2147 (2013) (applying 

standard in guilty plea context). Our review also leaves us 

with no doubt that the district court’s imposition of a sentence 
3

of 170 months’ imprisonment is procedurally and substantively 

reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire 

record for any meritorious grounds for appeal and have found 

none. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 

This court requires that counsel inform Jenkins, in writing, of 

his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for 

further review. If Jenkins requests that a petition be filed, 

but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, 

counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from 

representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof 

was served on Jenkins. We dispense with oral argument because 

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

AFFIRMED
§ 1.1141 What is the effect on a LAAF-accredited laboratory if its recognized accreditation body is no longer recognized by FDA? If a recognized accreditation body has its application for renewal of recognition denied, relinquishes its recognition or allows its recognition to expire, or has its recognition revoked, any laboratory LAAF-accredited by the accreditation body must take either the actions in paragraph (a) of this section or the action in paragraph (b) of this section no later than 30 calendar days after receiving the notice to the LAAF-accredited laboratory required under § 1.1115(g), § 1.1116(b), or § 1.1131(d)(2): ( a ) ( 1 ) The LAAF-accredited laboratory must submit to FDA documentation of the LAAF-accredited laboratory's most recent internal audit, required under § 1.1154(a)(5), documentation showing compliance with the conflict of interest requirements in § 1.1147, and documentation of the most recent proficiency test or comparison program result for each test method within the laboratory's scope of LAAF-accreditation, to show compliance with § 1.1138(a)(2); and
( 2 ) The laboratory must become LAAF-accredited by another recognized accreditation body before the laboratory's ISO/IEC 17025:2017(E) (incorporated by reference, see § 1.1101) accreditation lapses or not later than 1 year after the LAAF-accredited laboratory receives the applicable notice under § 1.1115(g), § 1.1116(b), or § 1.1131(d)(2), whichever is sooner.
( b ) The LAAF-accredited laboratory initiates relinquishment of its LAAF-accreditation under § 1.1140, with the relinquishment to occur within 90 calendar days.
#### § 745.124 Conditions.

With respect to any research project or any class of research projects the department or agency head of either the conducting or the supporting Federal department or agency may impose additional conditions prior to or at the time of approval when in the judgment of the department or agency head additional conditions are necessary for the protection of human subjects.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 830 Reported in House (RH)]

<DOC>

                                                 House Calendar No. 139
115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 830

                          [Report No. 115-640]

 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5192) to authorize the 
   Commissioner of Social Security to provide confirmation of fraud 
 protection data to certain permitted entities, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 16, 2018

    Mr. Byrne, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5192) to authorize the 
   Commissioner of Social Security to provide confirmation of fraud 
 protection data to certain permitted entities, and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 5192) to authorize the 
Commissioner of Social Security to provide confirmation of fraud 
protection data to certain permitted entities, and for other purposes. 
All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In 
lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
Committee on Ways and Means now printed in the bill, an amendment in 
the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee 
Print 115-68 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, 
shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in 
the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further 
amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: 
(1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one 
motion to recommit with or without instructions.
                                                 House Calendar No. 139

115th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                              H. RES. 830

                          [Report No. 115-640]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5192) to authorize the 
   Commissioner of Social Security to provide confirmation of fraud 
 protection data to certain permitted entities, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             April 16, 2018

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended
      March 31, 2008 (the “Report”) of Patient Safety Technologies, Inc. (the
“Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
      hereof, I, William Adams, as the Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted by Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge,
      that:





(1)
      the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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
      Registrant.





Dated:
                May 20, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                William AdamsWilliam
                AdamsChief
                Executive Officer





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request.
§ 75.36 Special reports. ( a ) This section applies to licensees, certificate holders, and possessors of nuclear material outside facilities who: ( 1 ) Have been given notice under § 75.7(a) that their facilities are subject to the application of IAEA safeguards, or
( 2 ) Are subject to the U.S.-IAEA Caribbean Territories Safeguards Agreement.
( b ) Each entity subject to this section shall immediately make a special report to the NRC, by telephone, if: ( 1 ) There is a loss of nuclear material: ( i ) In excess of specified limits, as stated in license conditions, for those entities described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, or
( ii ) In any amount, for those entities described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section,
( 2 ) There are unexpected changes in containment to the extent that unauthorized removal of nuclear material has become possible, or
( 3 ) Reporting is required under a license condition.
[83 FR 19614, May 4, 2018]
# San Joaquin Valley**i] ~**  AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT 

# HEALTHY AIR 

# LIVING'·

June 21, 2011 Mr. Mike Guzzetta , Manager Rule Evaluation Section California Air Resources Board P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812 Dear Mr . Guzzetta: Attached is the Rule Action Package for Rule 2410 (Prevention of Significant Deterioration) that was adopted by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District's Governing Board on June 16, 2011. We request the California Air Resources Board (ARB) transmit this rule and the appropriate documentation to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a SIP revision. Included in this Rule Action Package are the following attachments: 1. ARB SIP Completeness Checklist 2. ARB APCD/AQMD Rule Evaluation Form 3. Clean copy of Rule 2410 4. Governing Board Resolution 5. Evidence of Public Hearing 6. Other Materials (Staff Report, Public Comments and District Responses, Draft Rules, and Board Memo) If you have any questions regarding this rule, please contact Carlos Garcia at (559) 230­ 6000 or bye-mail at carlos.garcia@valleyair.org. The District thanks you and your staff for your assistance .

David Warner. Director of Permit Services Attachments

Northern Region Central Region (Main Office) Southern Region 4800 Ente rpri s e Way 1990 E. Gettysburg Ave nu e 34946 Flyover Court Modesto , CA 95356 ­ 8718 Fresno , CA 93726-02 4 4 Bakers field , CA 93308 ­ 9725 Tel : ( 209) 557 -6400 FAX: ( 209 ) 557 -6475 Tel : (559) 230-6000 FAX : (559) 230-6061 Tel: 661 -392 - 5500 FAX: 661 -392-5585 w

ww .valieyair .org www_healthyairliving .c o m P rinted on recy c led paper . 0
SERVED: January 29, 2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICEOFHEARINGS i 'ECE'VE". D 

WASHINGTON, DC J .. , · I 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

ABO SUPPLY LLC 

FDMS NO. FAA-2013-0713 

JAN 3 0 2014 

HEARING DOCKET 

DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ALLOWANCE TO RESPOND TO 

"COMPAINANT'SMOTION FOR DECISION" OUT OF TIME 

On behalf of ABO Supply LLC ("ABO"), Defendant in this action, we hereby move the 

Court to accept Defendant's Reponse to Complainant's Motion for Decision Out of Time. 

Complainant, on January 9, 2014, filed its Motion For Decision. Complainant served 

··. notice of same and that notice was received by Defendant's counsel (undersigned), but 

misfiled in that same instant. As a result, the deadline was not noted or docketed and this 

error deprives the Court of a timely response specifically addressing, countering, 

challenging, and documenting crucial relevant facts that this Court should have before it 

in considering Complainant's Motion. 

WHEREFORE, on behalf of ABO, we hereby respectfully request that the Court accept 

Defendant's proffered Response and attached Exhibits submitted this date. 

c' 

Givens & Johns n, PLLC 

Attorneys for ABO Supply LLC 

950 Echo Lane, Suite 360 

Houston, TX 77024 

713-932-1540 

713-932-1542 fax
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 903 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 903

      To restrict funding for the Preparatory Commission for the 
   Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 7, 2017

 Mr. Wilson of South Carolina (for himself, Mr. Rogers of Alabama, Mr. 
   Byrne, and Mr. Lamborn) introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To restrict funding for the Preparatory Commission for the 
   Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, 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. RESTRICTION ON FUNDING FOR THE PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR 
              THE COMPREHENSIVE NUCLEAR-TEST-BAN TREATY ORGANIZATION.

    (a) Statement of Policy.--Congress declares that United Nations 
Security Council Resolution 2310 (September 23, 2016) does not obligate 
the United States nor does it impose an obligation on the United States 
to refrain from actions that would run counter to the object and 
purpose of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.
    (b) Restriction on Funding.--
            (1) In general.--No United States funds may be made 
        available to the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive 
        Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization.
            (2) Exception.--The restriction under paragraph (1) shall 
        not apply with respect to the availability of United States 
        funds for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty 
        Organization's International Monitoring System.
                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Crayton, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted (see *People v Crawford,*71 AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Niagara County Court — attempted assault, second degree.) Present — Cardamone, J. P., Hancock, Jr., Schnepp, Doerr and Moule, JJ.
Order entered April 15, 2020

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 19

- 01014

- CV

ADA RENEE LAWRENCE, INDIVIDUALLY, ET AL. , Appellant s

V.

STEWART CREEK VILLAS LP, ET AL. , Appellee s
On Appeal from the 199th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 199

- 04308

- 2016

ORDER
Before the Court is appellants’ April 13, 2020 motion for an extension of time to file a response to appellees’ joint motion to di smiss the appeal and appellees’ response to the motion. We GRANT the motion and extend the time to May 15, 2020

. In their response to the motion, appellees request an extension of time to file their respective briefs on the merits. We GRANT the request a nd extend the time

to June 15, 2020

. /s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
H. Res. 958

In the House of Representatives, U.S., 

July 28, 2006.

Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule 

XIII for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House 

is waived with respect to any resolution reported on the legislative day of July 28, 2006, providing for consideration or 

disposition of any of the following measures: 

(1) A conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 

2830) to amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 

to reform the pension funding rules, and for other purposes. 

(2) A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 

1986 to increase the unified credit against the estate tax 

to an exclusion equivalent of $5,000,000, to repeal the 

sunset provision for the estate and generation-skipping 

taxes, and to extend expiring provisions, and for other 

purposes. 
2

•HRES 958 EH 

(3) A bill to provide economic security for all Americans, and for other purposes. 

Attest:

Clerk.
**EXHIBIT12.1**

 

**HospitalityProperties Trust**

**Computationof Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges**

**(inthousands, except ratio amounts)**

 
| ** **                                                           | ** ** | **Year Ended December 31,** | ** ** |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|--------------------------------------------|------------|
| ** **                                                           | ** ** | **2007**                                   | ** ** | **2006** | ** ** | **2005** | ** ** | **2004** | ** ** | **2003** | ** ** |
|                                                                 |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Income from continuing operations                                    |       | $                                          | 227,817    |   | $ | 156,501 |   | $ | 118,779 |   | $ | 116,221 |   | $ | 227,432 |   |
| Fixed charges                                                        |       | 140,517                                    |       | 81,451 |   | 65,263 |   | 50,393 |   | 44,536 |   |
| Adjusted earnings                                                    |       | $                                          | 368,334    |   | $ | 237,952 |   | $ | 184,042 |   | $ | 166,614 |   | $ | 271,968 |   |
|                                                                 |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Fixed charges:                                                       |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Interest on indebtedness and amortization  of deferred finance costs |       | $                                          | 140,517    |   | $ | 81,451 |   | $ | 65,263 |   | $ | 50,393 |   | $ | 44,536 |   |
|                                                                 |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                   |       | 2.62                                       | x          | 2.92 | x | 2.82 | x | 3.31 | x | 6.11 | x |

 

----
Editorial Note on Part 102
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 102 appear at 81 FR 49895, July 29, 2016.

§ 102.49 Fried clams made from minced clams. ( a ) The common or usual name of the food product that resembles and is of the same composition as fried clams, except that it is composed of comminuted clams, shall be “fried clams made from minced clams.”
( b ) The words “made from minced clams” shall immediately follow or appear on a line(s) immediately below the words “fried clams” and in easily legible boldface print or type in distinct contrast to other printed or graphic matter, and in a height not less than the larger of the following alternatives: ( 1 ) Not less than one-sixteenth inch in height on packages having a principal display panel with an area of 5 square inches or less and not less than one-eighth inch in height if the area of the principal display panel is greater than 5 square inches; or
( 2 ) Not less than one-half the height of the largest type used in the words “fried clams.”
**EXHIBIT12.2**

**HospitalityProperties TrustComputation of Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and PreferredDistributions****(in thousands, except ratio amounts)**
| ** **                                                                  | ** ** | **Year Ended December 31,** | ** ** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|--------------------------------------------|------------|
| ** **                                                                  | ** ** | **2006**                                   | ** ** | **2005** | ** ** | **2004** | ** ** | **2003** | ** ** | **2002** | ** ** |
|                                                                        |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Net income                                                                  |       | $                                          | 169,039    |   | $ | 129,903 |   | $ | 127,091 |   | $ | 238,213 |   | $ | 142,202 |   |
| Fixed charges                                                               |       | 81,451                                     |       | 65,263 |   | 50,393 |   | 44,536 |   | 42,424 |   |
| Adjusted earnings                                                           |       | $                                          | 250,490    |   | $ | 195,166 |   | $ | 177,484 |   | $ | 282,749 |   | $ | 184,626 |   |
|                                                                        |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|                                                                        |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Fixed charges and  preferred distributions:                                 |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Interest on  indebtedness and amortization of deferred finance costs        |       | $                                          | 81,451     |   | $ | 65,263 |   | $ | 50,393 |   | $ | 44,536 |   | $ | 42,424 |   |
| Preferred  distributions                                                    |       | 7,656                                      |       | 7,656 |   | 9,674 |   | 14,780 |   | 7,572 |   |
| Total combined fixed  charges   and preferred distributions                 |       | $                                          | 89,107     |   | $ | 72,919 |   | $ | 60,067 |   | $ | 59,316 |   | $ | 49,996 |   |
|                                                                        |       |                                       |       |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Ratio of earnings to combined   fixed charges and preferred   distributions |       | 2.81                                       | x          | 2.68 | x | 2.95 | x | 4.77 | x | 3.69 | x |

 

 

----