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

[108th Congress Public Law 254]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ254.108]

[[Page 118 STAT. 688]]

Public Law 108-254
108th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
 137 East Young High Pike in Knoxville, Tennessee, as the ``Ben Atchley 
     Post Office Building''. <<NOTE: June 25, 2004 -  [H.R. 3769]>> 

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 137 East 
Young High Pike in Knoxville, Tennessee, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Ben Atchley Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Ben Atchley Post Office 
Building''.

    Approved June 25, 2004.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 3769:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):
            Mar. 2, considered and passed House.
            June 9, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 491 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 491

 A resolution affirming and recognizing the Khmer, Laotian, Hmong, and 
the other ethnic groups commonly referred to as Montagnards of Cambodia 
and Laos who supported and defended the United States Armed Forces and 
                       freedom in Southeast Asia.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 28, 2017

Mr. Duffy (for himself, Mr. Grothman, and Mr. Perlmutter) submitted the 
 following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 A resolution affirming and recognizing the Khmer, Laotian, Hmong, and 
the other ethnic groups commonly referred to as Montagnards of Cambodia 
and Laos who supported and defended the United States Armed Forces and 
                       freedom in Southeast Asia.

Whereas many Khmer, Laotian, Hmong, and Montagnards--

    (1) fought and died with the United States Armed Forces during the 
conflict in Southeast Asia;

    (2) rescued United States pilots shot down in enemy-controlled 
territory and returned the pilots to safety;

    (3) captured and destroyed enemy supplies and prevented enemy forces 
from using the supplies to kill members of the United States Armed Forces;

    (4) gathered and provided to the United States Armed Forces 
intelligence about enemy troop positions, movement, and strength; and

    (5) provided food, shelter, and support to the United States Armed 
Forces; and

Whereas the National Armed Forces of Cambodia facilitated the evacuation of the 
        United States Embassy in Phnom Penh on April 12, 1975, by continuing to 
        fight Khmer Rouge forces as they advanced upon the capital: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives affirms and recognizes 
these Khmer, Laotian, Hmong, and Montagnard people of Cambodia and Laos 
for their support and defense of the United States Armed Forces and 
freedom in Southeast Asia.
                                 <all>
```
§ 1150.15 Disputes. ( a ) A domestic tobacco manufacturer or importer may dispute an FDA assessment. The dispute must include the basis for the dispute, and the dispute must be: ( 1 ) Submitted in writing;
( 2 ) Received by FDA no later than 45 days after the date on the assessment notification;
( 3 ) Legible and in English; and
( 4 ) Sent to the address found on our website (*https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/manufacturing/tobacco-user-fees*).
( b ) If FDA determines that there was an error related to the assessment and the assessment was too high, FDA will refund the amount assessed in error to the domestic manufacturer or importer.
( c ) FDA will provide a dated, written response, and its response will provide information about how to submit a request for further Agency review.
( d ) A request for further Agency review under § 10.75 of this chapter may be submitted. Such a request must be submitted in writing by the domestic manufacturer or importer and received by FDA within 30 days from the date on FDA's response. The request for further Agency review must be legible, in English, and submitted to the address found on our website (*https://www.fda.gov/tobacco-products/manufacturing/tobacco-user-fees*).
[79 FR 39310, July 10, 2014, as amended at 89 FR 13980, Feb. 26, 2024]
Editorial Note on Part 107
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 107 appear at 81 FR 49895, July 29, 2016.

§ 107.210 Firm-initiated product removals. ( a ) If a manufacturer has determined to recall voluntarily from the market an infant formula that is not subject to § 107.200 but that otherwise violates the laws and regulations administered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and that would be subject to legal action, the manufacturer, upon prompt notification to FDA, shall administer such voluntary recall consistent with the requirements of this subpart.
( b ) If a manufacturer has determined to withdraw voluntarily from the market an infant formula that is adulterated or misbranded in only a minor way and that would not be subject to legal action, such removal from the market is deemed to be a market withdrawal, as defined in § 7.3(j) of this chapter. As required by § 107.240(a), the manufacturer shall promptly notify FDA of such violative formula and may, but is not required to, conduct such market withdrawal consistent with the requirements of this subpart pertaining to product recalls.
### HEAL **RECORD LAYOUT FOR REPORTING HEAL LOAN PURCHASES AND CONSOLIDATIONS**  **Required for Consolidation**  **Loan Required for** 

**Non**   ** Consolidation** **Loan Field Description**  **Columns Length**  **Type**

**X X**  **Social Security Number (No Dashes) 1**  **- 9**  **9 N**  **X X**  **HEAL -**  **assigned Loan ID ( Required)**  **11 -** **22 12**  **N Date of First Disbursement for each loan (YYYYMM)**  **24 -** **29 6**  **A/N Originating Lender ID Number**  **31 -** **36 6**  **A/N X**  **X Name of Borrower (Last, First, MI)**  **38 -**  **67 30**  **A X**  **X Transaction Type**  **Loan Purchase P = Purchase of a Non**  **- consolidated Loan**  **PC = Purchase of Consolidated Loan Loan Consolidation**  **C = New Consolidated Loan 69**  **- 70**  **2 A** 

**X X**  **Date of Purchase/Consolidation (YYYYMM) 72**  **- 77**  **6 N**  **X X**  **Servicer ID Number 79**  **- 84**  **6 N**  **X X**  **Current Holder ID Number 85**  **- 90**  **6 N**  **X Consolidated Amount**  **Includes dol lars and cents with decimal in position 95**  **92 -**  **100 9**  **A/N**
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 200 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States 

should develop and adopt a comprehensive cybersecurity policy. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 16, 2017 

Mr. TAYLOR (for himself and Mr. RUPPERSBERGER) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

the United States should develop and adopt a comprehensive cybersecurity policy. 

Whereas nine megabreaches occurred in 2015, each resulting 

in the compromise of more than 10 million personal identities; 

Whereas one such megabreach of the background investigation databases of the United States Office of Personnel 

Management resulted in the compromise of the sensitive 

personal information of more than 21 million individuals; 

Whereas increasing interconnectedness, facilitated by ubiquitous Internet usage and availability in virtually all aspects of modern life, places all individuals, businesses, 

public and private entities, and critical infrastructures at 

significant and persistent risk of cyber attack; 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 200 IH 

Whereas continuous and rapid technological advancements result in constantly shifting cyber realities with respect to 

which policymakers have been unable to keep pace; and 

Whereas malicious cyber activity has the potential to cause 

great harm to the national security, economy, and infrastructure of the United States and the health, well-being, 

and safety of United States citizens: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the United States should develop and 

3 adopt a comprehensive cybersecurity policy that clearly de4 fines acts of aggression, acts of war, and other related 

5 events in cyberspace, including any commensurate re6 sponses to any such act or event in cyberspace. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
###### Editorial Note on Part 180

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 180 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 180.210 Which nonprocurement transactions are covered transactions?

All nonprocurement transactions, as defined in § 180.970, are covered transactions unless listed in the exemptions under § 180.215.
#### Tyrone Williams, Respondent, v Ryder TRS, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[816 NYS2d 126]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Silverman, J.), dated July 6, 2005, as granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to strike their answer based on the failure of the defendant Columbus Williams to appear for an examination before trial.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof granting that branch of the motion which was to strike the defendants’ answer and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the motion and precluding the defendant Columbus Williams from offering any testimony at trial unless he appears for a deposition at a time and place mutually agreeable to the parties, but in no event less than 30 days before trial; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and the answer is reinstated.

*785To invoke the drastic remedy of striking an answer, it must be shown that a defendant’s failure to comply with disclosure was the result of willful, contumacious and deliberate conduct *(see*CPLR 3126; *Cianciolo v Trism Specialized Carriers,*274 AD2d 369, 370 [2000]; *Vaneott v Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co.,*271 AD2d 438 [2000]). In our opinion, the plaintiffs did not make this showing.

Accordingly, the appropriate remedy was to preclude the defendant Columbus Williams from offering any testimony at trial unless he is deposed before the trial *(see Viteritti v Gelfand,*289 AD2d 566 [2001]; *Solomon v Horie Karate Dojo,*283 AD2d 480 [2001]). Florio, J.P., Santucci, Mastro, Rivera and Covello, JJ., concur.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****The Secretary of the Army�sSenior Review Panel report on sexual harassment**
 
Volumes: 0102
 
SuDoc Number:D 101.2:SE 9/V.1-2
Item Number:0325 (MF) | 0325 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000566263
 
February 19, 2020
§ 415.2 Acknowledgement of USDA Support on Publications and Audiovisuals. ( a ) *Definitions.* ( 1 ) “Audiovisual” means a product containing visual imagery or sound or both. Examples of audiovisuals are motion pictures, live or prerecorded radio or television programs, slide shows, filmstrips, audio recordings, and multimedia presentations.
( 2 ) “Production of an audiovisual” means any of the steps that lead to a finished audiovisual, including design, layout, script-writing, filming, editing, fabrication, sound recording or taping. The term does not include the placing of captions for the hearing impaired on films or videotapes not originally produced for use with the hearing impaired.
( 3 ) “Publication” means a published book, periodical, pamphlet, brochure, flier, or similar item. It does not include any audiovisuals.
( b ) *Publications.* Recipients shall have an acknowledgement of USDA awarding agency support placed on any publications written or published with grant support and, if feasible, on any publication reporting the results of, or describing, a grant-supported activity.
( c ) *Audiovisuals.* Recipients shall have an acknowledgement of USDA awarding agency support placed on any audiovisual which is produced with grant support and which has a direct production cost to the recipient of over $5,000. Unless the other provisions of the grant award make it apply, this requirement does not apply to: ( 1 ) Audiovisuals produced as research instruments or for documenting experimentation or findings and not intended for presentation or distribution to the general public.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
( d ) *Waivers.* USDA awarding agencies may waive any requirement of this section.
#### Buckland *v.*Tonsmere & Craft.

*Garishment on Judgment; Contested Claim of Exemption.*

1. *Claim of exemption against garnishment; amended inventory; what is reusable.*— When a claim of exemption is interposed to money in the hands of a garnishee, it must be accompanied with a statutory inventory of the debtor’s property (Code, §2538); and if a defective inventory is filed, and objected to, it is discretionary with the court, after the expiration of the time within which the debtor has a right. to file a sufficient inventory, to allow a new or amended inventory to be filed, and its refusal is not revisable.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Mobile.

Tried before the Hon. Wm. E. Clarice.

Judgment in.favor of Tpnsmere& Craft against E. E. Buck-land, recovered May 11th, 1886; garnishment against the M. & O. Railroad Company, sued out March 8th, 1889; answer of garnishee, admitting indebtedness, filed May 11th, 1889 ; claim of exemption filed May 13th, 1889; and judgment discharging garnishee, as shown more fully by the former report of the case, 88 Ala. 312-18. After the reversal and remandment, the defendant asked leave to file a new or amended inventory, but the court would not allow it; and this ruling is here assigned as error.

Russell & Boone, for appellant.

AV. E. Richardson, *contra.*

McCLELLAN, J.

The opinion in this case on a former appeal (88 Ala. 312) is decisive of the question now presented. It was then held that, the time within which the defendant had a *right*to file a sufficent inventory having elapsed, the plaintiff “could have moved for judgment against the garnishee, on the ground that no sufficient claim of exemption had been filed; or, pursuing the course he did, it was his right to demand a fuller inventory. Pursuing either course, it was within the discretion of the presiding judge, with or without terms, to allow an inventory to be filed, or the imperfect one amended. ” Upon the remandment of the cause, the judge of the Circuit Court exercised this discretion, by declining to allow a new (or amended) inventory to be filed; and his action in that re*504gard, which does not trench upon any *right*the defendant had, is not revisable.

The judgment of the Circuit Court is, therefore, affirmed, on the authority of *Tonsmere & Craft v. Buckland,*88 Ala. 312.

Affirmed.
§ 71.35 Package evaluation. The application must include the following: ( a ) A demonstration that the package satisfies the standards specified in subparts E and F of this part;
( b ) For a fissile material package, the allowable number of packages that may be transported in the same vehicle in accordance with § 71.59; and
( c ) For a fissile material shipment, any proposed special controls and precautions for transport, loading, unloading, and handling and any proposed special controls in case of an accident or delay.
## THE STATE OF TEXAS

MANDATE

TO THE 354TH DISTRIC T COURT OF HUNT COUN TY, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 8th

day of July, A.D. 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your Judgment was determined;

and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

Joseph John Grubbs, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee No. 06

- 14

- 00117

- CR

Trial Court No. 29,725

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Joseph John Grubbs, has adequately indicated his inability to

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court in this

behalf, and in all things to have it duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Josh R. Morriss, III, Chief Justice of our said Court of Appe als, with

the seal thereof annexed, at the City of Texarkana, this the 2nd day of September , A.D. 2015

.

DEBRA K. AUTREY , Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           8,800
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  116,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                     7,500
<INVENTORY>                                     88,300
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               230,000
<PP&E>                                       1,094,500
<DEPRECIATION>                                 517,100
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 981,300
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          124,400
<BONDS>                                        865,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       177,300
<OTHER-SE>                                   (212,300)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   981,300
<SALES>                                        628,800
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               628,800
<CGS>                                          572,400
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  639,300
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              61,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (75,100)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (28,800)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (46,300)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (25,100)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (71,400)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.34)
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 109
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 109 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 109.7 Unavoidability. ( a ) Tolerances and action levels in this part are established at levels based on the unavoidability of the poisonous or deleterious substance concerned and do not establish a permissible level of contamination where it is avoidable.
( b ) Compliance with tolerances, regulatory limits, and action levels does not excuse failure to observe either the requirement in section 402(a)(4) of the act that food may not be prepared, packed, or held under insanitary conditions or the other requirements in this chapter that food manufacturers must observe current good manufacturing practices. Evidence obtained through factory inspection or otherwise indicating such a violation renders the food unlawful, even though the amounts of poisonous or deleterious substances are lower than the currently established tolerances, regulatory limits, or action levels. The manufacturer of food must at all times utilize quality control procedures which will reduce contamination to the lowest level currently feasible.
[42 FR 52819, Sept. 30, 1977, as amended at 55 FR 20785, May 21, 1990]
(logo) CWCapital 

Asset Management LLC

 

 

Annual Statement as to Compliance

For the Period of January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014

 

 

 

JPMCC 2013-C10

 

 

                

In accordance with Item 1123 of Regulation AB andwith the requirements detailed in Section 11.09 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the “Agreement”) for the above-mentioned CMBS pool, (the “CMBS Pool”), CWCapital Asset Management LLC (“CWCAM”), in its capacity as Special Servicer, is providing this Officer’s Certificate with respect to the following:

 

(A)          a review of CWCAM’s activities during the preceding calendar year or portion thereof (the “Reporting Period”) and of CWCAM’s performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer’s supervision and; 

 

(B)           to the best of such officer’s knowledge, based on such review, CWCAM has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.  

 

Sincerely,

CWCapital Asset Management LLC

/s/ David B. Iannarone

David B. Iannarone

President

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7501 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 500 West, Bethesda, MD  20814 www.cwcapital.com