alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 808

In the House of Representatives, U.S., 

May 22, 2006.

Whereas national workforce professional organizations and 

the local workforce investment boards will celebrate National One-Stop Month from May 1 to 31, 2006; 

Whereas workforce investment boards and One-Stop delivery 

system were created under the Workforce Investment Act 

of 1998 and are designed to provide a full range of employment solutions to employers and job seekers in a single location; 

Whereas more than 600 workforce investment boards and 

2,000 One-Stop Career Centers are enhancing the productivity and competitiveness of the Nation by providing 

workforce solutions for hundreds of thousands of employers annually across the United States; 

Whereas, in the spirit of the Workforce Investment Act, the 

cornerstones of maximizing customer choice, employment 

and training solutions, and universal access are the primary missions of the One-Stop delivery system, allowing 

more than 14,000,000 job seekers annually the opportunity to connect with the tools they need for their next 

career opportunity; 

Whereas each year the One-Stop delivery system and regional 

workforce investment boards contribute to the competi-
2

•HRES 808 EH 

tiveness of the Nation’s workforce by providing training 

assistance through grants to job seekers and employed 

workers and other programs to more than 400,000 Americans so they may upgrade or acquire new skills; and 

Whereas, in the spirit of the Workforce Investment Act, the 

private sector leadership of the regional workforce investment boards provides the planning, oversight, and accountability of workforce strategies that succeed in communities across the country: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) supports the goals of National One-Stop Month; 

and 

(2) supports the efforts of the workforce investment 

boards and One-Stop delivery system in preparing the 

Nation’s workforce.

Attest: 

Clerk.
§ 1.1115 How will FDA evaluate applications for recognition and renewal of recognition? ( a ) *Review of application for recognition or renewal of recognition.* FDA will review an accreditation body's application for recognition or renewal of recognition for completeness and notify the applicant of any insufficiencies. FDA generally will review accreditation body applications for recognition or renewal of recognition in the order in which completed applications are received; however, FDA may prioritize the review of specific applications to meet program needs.
( b ) *Evaluation of application for recognition or renewal of recognition.* FDA will evaluate a complete application for recognition or renewal of recognition to determine whether the applicant meets the requirements for recognition. Such evaluation may include an onsite evaluation of the accreditation body. If FDA does not reach a final decision on an application for renewal of recognition before an accreditation body's recognition expires, FDA may extend the existing term of recognition for a specified period of time or until FDA reaches a final decision on the application for renewal of recognition.
( c ) *Grant of recognition.* FDA will notify the applicant that its application for recognition or renewal of recognition has been approved and will include any conditions associated with the recognition.
( d ) *Duration of recognition.* FDA may grant recognition of an accreditation body for a period not to exceed 5 years from the date of recognition, except under the circumstances described in paragraph (b) of this section.
( e ) *Denial of application for recognition or renewal of recognition.* FDA will notify the applicant that its application for recognition or renewal of recognition has been denied and will state the basis for such denial and describe the procedures for requesting reconsideration of the application under § 1.1171.
( f ) *Notice of records custodian after denial of an application for renewal of recognition.* Within 10 business days of the date of FDA's issuance of a denial of an application for renewal of recognition, the applicant must provide the name and contact information of the custodian who will maintain required records and make them available to FDA under § 1.1124. The contact information must include an email address for the records custodian and the street address where the records required under § 1.1124 will be located.
( g ) *FDA notice to LAAF-accredited laboratories.* FDA will promptly notify all laboratories LAAF-accredited by the accreditation body whose application for renewal of recognition was denied, informing them of such denial.
( h ) *Public notice of denial of an application for renewal of recognition of an accreditation body.* FDA will provide public notice on the website described in § 1.1109 of the issuance of a denial of an application for renewal of recognition and will include the date of the issuance of such denial.
Motion Granted; Case Reinstated; Order filed May 16, 2019 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-18-00690-CV

____________

KEEBLE LOVALL & LIZ YOUNG, Appellant

V.

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, NOT IN IT'S INDIVIDUAL 

CAPACITY BUT SOLEY AS TRUSTEE FOR THE RMAC TRUST, 

SERIES 2016-CTT, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 18-CCV-061841

ORDER

Appellant filed a petition for voluntary bankruptcy in the United States 

Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas. When this court received 

notice of appellant’s bankruptcy filing on August 23, 2018, we stayed all 

proceedings in the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 8.2. 

On April 30, 3019, appellee filed a motion to reinstate the appeal pursuant to 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 8.3(a). 

The motion is granted. Accordingly, the case is ordered REINSTATED and 

placed on the court’s active docket. 
Appellant’s brief is due to be filed with the clerk of this court on or before

June 17, 2019.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Hassan.
#### § 111.360 What are the requirements for sanitation?

You must conduct all manufacturing operations in accordance with adequate sanitation principles.
H. Res. 230 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

March 28, 2017. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to consider in the House the joint resolution (S.J. 

Res. 34) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Federal Communications Commission relating to ‘‘Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other 

Telecommunications Services’’. All points of order against 

consideration of the joint resolution are waived. The joint resolution shall be considered as read. All points of order 

against provisions in the joint resolution are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 

divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
2 

•HRES 230 EH 

member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce; and (2) 

one motion to commit. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
### 1 A tt ac h m e n t

D e a r M s

. R i ve r a :

P l e as e a c c e p t t h e s e pub l i c c o m m e n t s o n t h e Supp l e m e n t

a l S t a t e m e n t o f Ba s

i s P S D p e r m i t app l i c

a t i o n for A v

e na l

E n e r g y P roj e c t

. W e p l an t

o m ak e o ur c o m m e n t s ve rb a l ly a t t h e pub l i c h e a r i n g as w el l

.

T han k y o u

,

L a u r a B ak e r

St a ff A tto r n ey

C e nt e r on R a c e

, P o v e r t y & t h e E nv i r o n m e nt

1302 J e f f e r s o n S t

. S u i t e 2

D e l a no

, C A 93215

( 661 ) 72 0

-

9140 x 303

( 661 ) 72 0

--

9483 f ax 

### A v e n a l E n e r gy P r o

j ec t P ub li c C o mm e n t s

L a u r a B a k e r

t o :

R 9 A i r P e r mit s

04 / 12 / 2011 02 : 05 P M

C c :

" I ng r i d B r o s t r o m "

H i d e D e t a i l s

F r o m: " L a u r a B a k e r " < l b a k e r @ c r p e

- e j

. o r g>

T o : R 9 A i r P e r mit s @ E P A

C c : " I ng r i d B r o s t r o m " < i b r o s t r o m @ c r p e

- e j

. o r g>

H i s t o r y : T h i s m e s s a g e h a s b e e n f o r w a r d e d

.

A v e n a l p s d p e r m i t c omm e n t s 2

. pdf 

### P a g e 1 o f 2

4 / 15 / 2011 f il e :// C :\ D o c u m e n t s a nd S e tti ng s \ S R I V E R 02 \ L o c a l S e tti ng s \ T e m p \ no t e s B AAA 25 \

~ w e b62

. ..L b a k e r @ c r pe

- e j

. o rg

www

. c r pe

-

e j

. o rg

P r o v i d i ng L e g a l a n d T e c h n i c a l A s s i s t a n c e t o t h e G r ass r o ot s M o v e m e n t f o r E nv i r o nm e nt a l

Ju s t i ce



### P R I V I L E G E A N D C O N F I D E N TI A L IT Y N O TI C E

T h i s m essa g e i s i nt e n d e d on l y f o r t h e u se o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l o r e nt i t y t o w h i c h i t i s a d d r ess e d

a n d m a y c ont a i n i n f o r m a t i on t h a t i s p r i v i l e g e d

, c o n f i d e nt i a l a n d e x e m pt f r o m d i s c l o s u r e

u n d e r a pp l i c a b l e l a w as a tto r n e y c l i e nt a n d w o r k

- p r o d u c t c o n f i d e nt i a l o r ot h e r w i se

c on f i d e nt i a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n s

. I f t h e r ea d e r o f t h i s m essa g e i s not t h e i nt e n d e d r e c i p i e nt

, y o u

a r e h e r e b y not i f i e d t h a t a n y d i sse m i n a t i on

, d i s t r i b u t i on

, o r c o p y i n g o f t h i s c omm u n i c a t i on o r

ot h e r u se o f a t r a n s m i s s i on r e c e i v e d i n e r r o r i s s t r i c t l y p r o h i b i t e d

. 

### P a g e 2 o f 2

4 / 15 / 2011 f il e :// C :\ D o c u m e n t s a nd S e tti ng s \ S R I V E R 02 \ L o c a l S e tti ng s \ T e m p \ no t e s B AAA 25 \

~ w e b62

. ..
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21

- 6304

BRIAN A. REAVIS , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. FNU STEVNE , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Terrence W. Boyle , District Judge. ( 5:20

- hc

- 02178

- BO )

Submitted : June 29, 2021 Decided: July 2, 2021

Before HARRIS, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Brian A. Reavis, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Brian A. Reavis seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismiss ing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. See Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 148 & n.9 (2012) (explaining that § 2254 petition s are subject to one

- year statute of limitations, running from
latest of four commencement dates enumerated in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). When , as here, the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the petition states a debatable
claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez , 565 U.S. at 140

- 41 (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000))

. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Reavis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argumen t would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
ANNA M. WHALEN,

Appellant,

v.

OPIS MANAGEMENT 

RESOURCES, LLC AND 

ESIS/WC CLAIMS,

Appellees.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-830

_____________________________/

Opinion filed January 16, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims.

Wilbur W. Anderson, Judge.

Date of Accident: May 6, 2008.

Wayne Johnson of DeCiccio & Johnson, Winter Park, for Appellant.

R. G. (Mack) McCormick, Jr. of the Bleakley Bavol Law Firm, Tampa, for 

Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

BENTON, WETHERELL, and SWANSON, JJ., CONCUR.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RENE EDGARDO ANDRES-CRUZ; et al., 

Petitioners, 

 v. 

MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting 

Attorney General, 

Respondent.

No. 18-70162 

Agency Nos. A208-377-914 

A208-377-915 

A208-373-976 

A208-373-977 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 15, 2019**

Before: TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Rene Edgardo Andres-Cruz and his family, natives and citizens of El 

Salvador, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order 

dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying their 

application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JAN 22 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-70162 

Against Torture. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de 

novo questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), 

except to the extent that deference is owed to the BIA’s interpretation of the 

governing statutes and regulations, Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th 

Cir. 2004). We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. 

Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We dismiss in part 

and deny in part the petition for review. 

We lack jurisdiction to consider petitioners’ proposed social group of 

“former police officers” that they raise for the first time in their opening brief. See 

Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004). 

The agency did not err in finding that petitioners’ proposed social group of 

“police officers in El Salvador targeted for harm by gangs” is not cognizable. See 

Cruz-Navarro v. INS, 232 F.3d 1024, 1029-30 (9th Cir. 2000) (current status as a 

police officer is not a cognizable protected group under the Immigration and 

Nationality Act). Thus, petitioners’ asylum and withholding of removal claims 

fail. 

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because 

petitioners failed to show it is more likely than not that they would be tortured by 

or with the consent or acquiescence of the Salvadoran government. See Aden v. 

Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
3 18-70162 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------

                                  CERTIFICATION
                  PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
              ACT OF 2002 (SUBSECTIONS (A) AND (B) OF SECTION 1350,
                   CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of National Datacomputer, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2004 (the
"Form 10-QSB") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information
contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: August 13, 2004                /s/ John P. Ward
                                      ------------------------------------
                                      John P. Ward
                                      Chairman of the Board, President and
                                      Chief Executive Officer


Dated: August 13, 2004                /s/ Gerald S. Eilberg
                                      ------------------------------------
                                      Gerald S. Eilberg
                                      Senior Vice President of Finance and
                                      Administration and Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Eastern Washington Cascades Provincial Advisory Committee and the Yakima Provincial Advisory Committee will meet on March 9, 2010 at the Sunnyslope Fire Station, 206 Easy Street, Wenatchee, WA. During this meeting information will be shared about Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest Restoration Strategy, Wilderness Society North Cascades Proposal, and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service update on the justification to not list the Pika as a threatened and endangered species. All Eastern Washington Cascades and Yakima Province Advisory Committee meetings are open to the public.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions regarding this meeting to Becki Heath, Designated Federal Official, USDA, Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest, 215 Melody Lane, Wenatchee, Washington 98801, phone 509-664-9200.

Dated: February 10, 2010.

Rebecca Lockett Heath,

Designated Federal Official, Okanogan-Wenatchee National Forest.

[FR Doc. 2010-3286 Filed 2-18-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
#### § 170.305 Federal award.

*Federal award,* for the purposes of this part, means an award of Federal financial assistance that a recipient receives directly from a Federal awarding agency.

[85 FR 49526, Aug. 13, 2020]
Editorial Note on Part 112
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 112 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 112.132 What must I do to control and dispose of trash, litter, and waste in areas used for covered activities? All of the following requirements apply to the control and disposal of trash, litter, and waste in areas used for covered activities: ( a ) You must convey, store, and dispose of trash, litter and waste to: ( 1 ) Minimize the potential for trash, litter, or waste to attract or harbor pests; and
( 2 ) Protect against contamination of covered produce, food contact surfaces, areas used for a covered activity, agricultural water sources, and agricultural water distribution systems with known or reasonably foreseeable hazards.
( b ) You must adequately operate systems for waste treatment and disposal so that they do not constitute a potential source of contamination in areas used for a covered activity.
# EUR-Lex - 31993R1718 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31993R1718

**Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1718/93 of 30 June 1993 regarding the operative event for the agricultural conversion rates used in the seeds sector **

*
Official Journal L 159 , 01/07/1993 P. 0103 - 0103 Finnish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 50 P. 0144 Swedish special edition: Chapter 3 Volume 50 P. 0144 *

COMMISSION REGULATION (EEC) No 1718/93 of 30 June 1993 regarding the operative event for the agricultural conversion rates used in the seeds sector

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3813/92 of 28 December 1992 on the unit of account and the conversion rates to be applied for the purposes of the common agricultural policy (1), and in particular Article 6 (2) thereof,

Whereas the aid introduced by Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2358/71 of 26 October 1971 on the common organization of the market in seeds (2), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3695/92 (3), may be granted in respect of the products referred to in the Annex to the said Regulation;

Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1546/75 of 18 June 1975 defining the event in which the aid in respect of seeds becomes due and payable (4), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2811/86 (5), defines the operative event for the agricultural conversion rate on the basis of legal criteria and provisions which have been fundamentally modified by the new agrimonetary arrangements introduced in Regulation (EEC) No 3813/92; whereas, in accordance with the new provisions, the event by means of which the economic objective is attained occurs during harvest and may therefore be considered to be 1 August of each marketing year; whereas, therefore, that date is the date of the operative event for the agricultural conversion rate applicable to aid to seed producers;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The rate to be applied for the purposes of the aid provided for in Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2358/71 shall be the agricultural conversin rate in force on 1 August of the marketing year in respect of which the aid is due.

Article 2

Regulation (EEC) No 1546/75 is hereby repealed.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 July 1993.

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

Done at Brussels, 30 June 1993.

For the Commission

René STEICHEN

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 387, 31. 12. 1992, p. 1.

(2) OJ No L 246, 5. 11. 1971, p. 1.

(3) OJ No L 374, 22. 12. 1992, p. 40.

(4) OJ No L 157, 19. 6. 1975, p. 14.

(5) OJ No L 260, 12. 9. 1986, p. 8.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

CHARLES PUGSLEY, Individually, and MEDICAID ELIGIBIILTY, INC., 

a Florida for Profit Corporation,

Appellants,

v.

ANDREWS. NEILSON, IV, as Personal Representative of the Estate of 

Melvin R. Angell,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-620

[November 25, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; John S. Kastrenakes, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2019-CA011351-XXXX-MB.

Michael E. Zapin of the Law Offices of Michael E. Zapin, Boca Raton, 

for appellants.

Sheila Biehl of Sheila Biehl, P.A., Stuart, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.