alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 3254.220 What contracts and subcontracts, in addition to those listed in 2 CFR 180.220, are covered transactions?

Although the OMB guidance at 2 CFR 180.220(c) allows a Federal agency to do so (also see options lower tier coverage in the figure in the appendix to 2 CFR part 180), NEA does not extend coverage of nonprocurement suspension and debarment requirements beyond first-tier procurement contracts under a covered nonprocurement transaction.
H. Res. 874

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

September 19, 2006.

Whereas older Americans have made countless contributions 

to the strength of the United States; 

Whereas older Americans include members of the ‘‘Greatest 

Generation’’ who fought in World War I, World War II, 

the Korean War, and other military conflicts, and have 

sacrificed at home and abroad to keep America free; 

Whereas in the United States and much of the world, older 

individuals throughout history have been viewed with respect, honor, and dignity as sources of wisdom and experience; 

Whereas this year the first of the ‘‘baby boom’’ generation 

turn age 60, adding to the 49 million Americans who are 

age 60 or older, including over 5 million who are older 

than age 85; and 

Whereas the talent and experience of older Americans can be 

utilized to meet community needs in critical areas such 

as education, health, community-based and faith-based 

social services, and homeland security: Now, therefore, be 

it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—
2

•HRES 874 EH 

(1) recognizes the importance of older Americans to 

the Nation’s past and future; 

(2) encourages multigenerational activities providing 

opportunities for children and students to listen and 

learn from older Americans; and 

(3) urges all Americans to honor and respect older 

Americans, and to offer appreciation for their contributions to the strength of the United States. 

Attest:

Clerk.
4123/2015 

### ;amt t;IOUO



## -

**~** 

## - \ 

### ' 

## ' ;, 

# . 

# .. Sherbttrne

**~** I'

**-~** ... 

# .. I Twin Cities Metro Area (13 County)- Mapsof.net 

# .... ,

# __, I t 

### i 

## I \ "\ (

**~**

**~** 

# ' / 

## ,. 

# ...

**~** ' 

# . ' 

# ·• • \.· 

### t

I 

## . \

# .. 

# - . ' 

# .. .. • 

# .\ I.

/

# . 

# . .•



# J

**,~** I

**~** St. CroixMinnesota maps (/minnesota). Click on the Twin Cities Metro Area (13 County) (/uploads/staticmaps/twin_cities_metro_area_(13_county).png) to view it full screen. File Type: png, File size: 317213 bytes (309.78 KB), Map Dimensions: 1200px x 929px (256 colors) 

## Resize this map Width: Height:

Submit You can resize this map. Enter height or width below and click on 'Submit' http:/lmapsof.net/map/twin-cities-metro-area-13-county 2!7
§ 801.930 Debarring official (Department of Veterans Affairs supplement to government-wide definition at 2 CFR 180.930). In addition to the debarring official listed at 2 CFR 180.930, the debarring official for the Department of Veterans Affairs is: ( a ) For the Veterans Health Administration, the Under Secretary for Health;
( b ) For the Veterans Benefits Administration, the Under Secretary for Benefits; and
( c ) For the National Cemetery Administration, the Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs.
#### § 2300.10 Applicable regulations.

The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards set forth in 2 CFR part 200 shall apply to the Social Security Administration.
#### § 902.225 Whom in the DOE does a recipient other than an individual notify about a criminal drug conviction?

A recipient other than an individual that is required under 2 CFR 182.225(a) to notify Federal agencies about an employee's conviction for a criminal drug offense must notify each DOE office from which it currently has an award.
###### Editorial Note on Part 110

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 110 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

#### § 110.93 Warehousing and distribution.

Storage and transportation of finished food shall be under conditions that will protect food against physical, chemical, and microbial contamination as well as against deterioration of the food and the container.
#### § 3001.505 Who in DHS determines that a recipient who is an individual violated the requirements of this part?

The Secretary of Homeland Security, or his or her official designee, will make the determination that a recipient who is an individual violated the requirements of this part.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

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

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

VICTOR OSWALDO GUERRA

BAUTISTA,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-70654

Agency No. A095-184-895

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 12, 2011** 

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

Victor Oswaldo Guerra Bautista, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions

for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his

motion to reopen proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have

jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of

FILED

JUL 25 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-70654

a motion to reopen, and we review de novo questions of law, including claims of

ineffective assistance of counsel. Hernandez v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1014, 1017

(9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Guerra Bautista’s motion to

reopen on the ground that he failed to show he was prejudiced by his former

counsel’s conduct. See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 899-90 (9th Cir. 2003)

(prejudice results when the performance of counsel “was so inadequate that it may

have affected the outcome of the proceedings”) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Guerra Bautista’s contention that an immigration consultant provided him

with ineffective assistance of counsel is foreclosed. See Hernandez, 524 F.3d at

1020 (knowing reliance upon the advice of a non-attorney cannot support a claim

for ineffective assistance of counsel in a removal proceeding). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
§ 1306.05 Manner of issuance of prescriptions. ( a ) All prescriptions for controlled substances shall be dated as of, and signed on, the day when issued and shall bear the full name and address of the patient, the drug name, strength, dosage form, quantity prescribed, directions for use, and the name, address and registration number of the practitioner.
( b ) A prescription for a Schedule III, IV, or V narcotic drug approved by FDA specifically for “detoxification treatment” or “maintenance treatment” must include the identification number issued by the Administrator under § 1301.28(d) of this chapter or a written notice stating that the practitioner is acting under the good faith exception of § 1301.28(e) of this chapter.
( c ) Where a prescription is for gamma-hydroxybutyric acid, the practitioner shall note on the face of the prescription the medical need of the patient for the prescription.
( d ) A practitioner may sign a paper prescription in the same manner as he would sign a check or legal document (e.g., J.H. Smith or John H. Smith). Where an oral order is not permitted, paper prescriptions shall be written with ink or indelible pencil, typewriter, or printed on a computer printer and shall be manually signed by the practitioner. A computer-generated prescription that is printed out or faxed by the practitioner must be manually signed.
( e ) Electronic prescriptions shall be created and signed using an application that meets the requirements of part 1311 of this chapter.
( f ) A prescription may be prepared by the secretary or agent for the signature of a practitioner, but the prescribing practitioner is responsible in case the prescription does not conform in all essential respects to the law and regulations. A corresponding liability rests upon the pharmacist, including a pharmacist employed by a central fill pharmacy, who fills a prescription not prepared in the form prescribed by DEA regulations.
( g ) An individual practitioner exempted from registration under § 1301.22(c) of this chapter shall include on all prescriptions issued by him the registration number of the hospital or other institution and the special internal code number assigned to him by the hospital or other institution as provided in § 1301.22(c) of this chapter, in lieu of the registration number of the practitioner required by this section. Each paper prescription shall have the name of the practitioner stamped, typed, or handprinted on it, as well as the signature of the practitioner.
( h ) An official exempted from registration under § 1301.23(a) of this chapter must include on all prescriptions issued by him his branch of service or agency (e.g., “U.S. Army” or “Public Health Service”) and his service identification number, in lieu of the registration number of the practitioner required by this section. The service identification number for a Public Health Service employee is his Social Security identification number. Each paper prescription shall have the name of the officer stamped, typed, or handprinted on it, as well as the signature of the officer.
[75 FR 16307, Mar. 31, 2010]
Exhibit 35.2

[First Republic Bank Logo]

Feb 28, 2017

Servicer Compliance Statement

For SEMT 2013-3 (see Schedule A)

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of First Republic Bank (the Servicer),
does hereby certify that:



| | (i) | a review of the Servicers activities during the reporting period from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 and of its performance under the Agreement (as defined on Schedule A attached hereto) from
the above referenced trust during such period has been made under such officers supervision, and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | to the best of such officers knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout such reporting period.
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



First Republic BankBy:

/s/ Ron TremblayName:

Ron TremblayTitle:

Vice President of Residential LendingDate:

Feb. 28, 2017




---

<for SEMT 2013-3>

SCHEDULE A



| | 1. | Flow Mortgage Loan Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2010, between Redwood Residential Acquisition Corporation and First Republic Bank, as modified by the Reconstitution Agreement dated March 1,
2013 (the Agreement).
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P 

I
 

x
 

8
 1
 

2
 

3
 

japanese · april 2003 
nih publication no. 03-5058

ndep 52 - xx japanese · april 2003
Editorial Note on Part 117
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 117.130 Hazard analysis. ( a ) *Requirement for a hazard analysis.* ( 1 ) You must conduct a hazard analysis to identify and evaluate, based on experience, illness data, scientific reports, and other information, known or reasonably foreseeable hazards for each type of food manufactured, processed, packed, or held at your facility to determine whether there are any hazards requiring a preventive control.
( 2 ) The hazard analysis must be written regardless of its outcome.
( b ) *Hazard identification.* The hazard identification must consider: ( 1 ) Known or reasonably foreseeable hazards that include: ( i ) Biological hazards, including microbiological hazards such as parasites, environmental pathogens, and other pathogens;
( ii ) Chemical hazards, including radiological hazards, substances such as pesticide and drug residues, natural toxins, decomposition, unapproved food or color additives, and food allergens; and
( iii ) Physical hazards (such as stones, glass, and metal fragments); and
( 2 ) Known or reasonably foreseeable hazards that may be present in the food for any of the following reasons: ( i ) The hazard occurs naturally;
( ii ) The hazard may be unintentionally introduced; or
( iii ) The hazard may be intentionally introduced for purposes of economic gain.
( c ) *Hazard evaluation.* ( 1 ) ( i ) The hazard analysis must include an evaluation of the hazards identified in paragraph (b) of this section to assess the severity of the illness or injury if the hazard were to occur and the probability that the hazard will occur in the absence of preventive controls.
( ii ) The hazard evaluation required by paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section must include an evaluation of environmental pathogens whenever a ready-to-eat food is exposed to the environment prior to packaging and the packaged food does not receive a treatment or otherwise include a control measure (such as a formulation lethal to the pathogen) that would significantly minimize the pathogen.
( 2 ) The hazard evaluation must consider the effect of the following on the safety of the finished food for the intended consumer: ( i ) The formulation of the food;
( ii ) The condition, function, and design of the facility and equipment;
( iii ) Raw materials and other ingredients;
( iv ) Transportation practices;
( v ) Manufacturing/processing procedures;
( vi ) Packaging activities and labeling activities;
( vii ) Storage and distribution;
( viii ) Intended or reasonably foreseeable use;
( ix ) Sanitation, including employee hygiene; and
( x ) Any other relevant factors, such as the temporal (*e.g.,* weather-related) nature of some hazards (*e.g.,* levels of some natural toxins).
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2015-5914 Directorate ID: 2014-SW-056-AD

Helicopter Model: 

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 33 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason: The actions of this AD are intended to detect corrosion and prevent failure of the main 

rotor hub torsion bar, loss of a main rotor blade, and subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter $7,020 torsion bar replacement

Labor per Helicopter

(8 work hours X $85 for 

inspection)

$680 per inspection cycle

Other

(Explain)

Total Cost per Helicopter $680 per inspection cycle

Total U.S. Fleet Cost $22,440 per inspection cycle

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: Robert Grant
Exhibit 35.2



LOGO

FIRST REPUBLIC BANK

Its a privilege to serve you®

Feb 28, 2018

Servicer Compliance Statement

For SEMT 2013-3 (see Schedule A)

The undersigned, a duly authorized officer of First Republic Bank (the Servicer), does hereby certify that:



| | (i) | a review of the Servicers activities during the reporting period from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 and of its performance under the Agreement (as defined on Schedule A attached hereto) from the
above referenced trust during such period has been made under such officers supervision, and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | to the best of such officers knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout such reporting period.
| | ---- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



First Republic BankBy:

/s/ Ron TremblayName:

Ron TremblayTitle:

Vice President of Residential LendingDate:

Feb. 28, 2018


San Francisco  Palo Alto  Los Angeles  Santa Barbara  Newport Beach  San
Diego  Portland  Palm Beach  Boston  Greenwich  New York





111 PINE STREET, SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA 94111, TEL (415) 392-1400 OR (800) 392-1400, FAX (415) 392-1413 WWW.FIRSTREPUBLIC.COM  MEMBER FDIC AND


LOGO
EQUAL HOUSING LENDER



---

LOGO

FIRST REPUBLIC BANK

Its a privilege to serve
you®

<for SEMT 2013-3>

SCHEDULE A



| | 1. | Flow Mortgage Loan Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2010, between Redwood Residential Acquisition Corporation and First Republic Bank, as modified by the Reconstitution Agreement dated March 1,
2013 (the Agreement).
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

San Francisco  Palo Alto  Los Angeles  Santa Barbara  Newport
Beach  San Diego  Portland  Palm Beach  Boston  Greenwich  New York





111 PINE STREET, SAN FRANCISCO,
CALIFORNIA 94111, TEL (415) 392-1400 OR (800) 392-1400, FAX (415) 392-1413 WWW.FIRSTREPUBLIC.COM  MEMBER FDIC AND


LOGO
EQUAL HOUSING LENDER
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. No. 97-4844 Non-Argument Calendar. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. Kenneth CHANG, Defendant-Appellant. May 28, 1998. Appeal from the United States Di strict Court for the Southern Di strict of Florida. (No. 96-653-CRLCN), Lenore C. Nesbitt, Judge. Before ANDERSON and DUBINA, Circuit Judge s, and FAY, Senior Circuit Judge. PER CURIAM: Kenneth Chang pled guilty on November 21, 1996 to one count of conspiracy to possess counterfeit currency in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 and one count of manufacturing counterfeit currency in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 471. At the March 27, 1997 sentencing hearing, the district court sentenced Chang to 41 months' incarceration, a three-year term of supervised release, and a $200 assessment. The district court did not advi se Chang of his right to appeal the sentence; nonetheless, Chang filed a timely notice of appeal . Paradoxically, the only issue raised by Chang in this appeal is that he was not advised of his ri ght to appeal. Because the district court's error was obviously harmless, we affirm.
Discussion Rule 32(c)(5) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure requires a sentencing court to advise a defendant of his right to appeal his sentence. In Thompson v. United States, 111 F.3d 109 (11th Cir.1997), Thompson was not advised of his right to appeal his sentence and, importantly, did2 not take an appeal. He brought a collateral ac tion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to vacate his sentence on that ground. We held that "the sent encing court's failure to advise Appellant of his right to appeal his sentence constitutes error per se, " and vacated Thompson's sentence. Id. at 110. We did so in order to effectuate the purpose of Rule 32(c)(5)—" "to insure that a convicted defendant be advised precisely of his right to a ppeal and to avoid a situation where the Government claims a defendant is otherwise aware of his right to appeal while the defendant denies such knowledge.' " Id. at 111, quoting, Paige v. United States, 443 F.2d 781, 782 (4th Cir.1971). Thompson does not require resentencing in this case. Here, there is no dispute as to whether Chang was aware of his right to appeal; hi s timely appeal belies any such claim. The per serule articulated in Thompson applies where a defendant is not advise d of his right to appeal and, in fact, does not appeal. In that situation, the per serule effectuates both the purpose of Rule 32(c)(5) and the added "policy of preventing excessive litigation." Thompson, 111 F.3d at 111. In this situation, neither rationale applies, and the violation of Rule 32(c)(5) was harmless. See United States v. Caswell, 36 F.3d 29, 30-31 (7th Cir.1994) (failure to advise defendant of right to appeal was harmless where district court extended time to appeal to accommodate defendant). AFFIRMED.
###### Editorial Note on Part 112

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 112 appear at 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

#### § 112.167 Can records that I provide to FDA be disclosed to persons outside of FDA?

Records obtained by FDA in accordance with this part are subject to the disclosure requirements under part 20 of this chapter.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of

ZERELL SHEREE JOHNSON-WELCH

PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT

FROM ADMINISTRATIVE SUSPENSION

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 61 DB 2018 (No. 21 RST 2018)

Attorney Registration No. 66848

(Out of State)

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of May, 2018, the Report and Recommendation of 

Disciplinary Board Member dated May 7, 2018, is approved and it is ORDERED that

Zerell Sheree Johnson-Welch, who has been on Administrative Suspension, has never 

been suspended or disbarred, and has demonstrated that she has the moral 

qualifications, competency and learning in law required for admission to practice in the 

Commonwealth, shall be and is, hereby reinstated to active status as a member of the 

Bar of this Commonwealth. The expenses incurred by the Board in the investigation and 

processing of this matter shall be paid by the Petitioner.