alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 376.935 Disqualified. (HHS supplement to government-wide definition at 2 CFR 180.935).

*Disqualified* means persons prohibited from participating in specified federal procurement and nonprocurement transactions pursuant to the statutes listed in 2 CFR 180.935, and pursuant to Title XI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7, 1320a-7a, 1320c-5, and 1395ccc) as enforced by the HHS Office of the Inspector General.
Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report of BNP Residential Properties, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Philip
S. Payne, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.







  /s/ Philip S. Payne

Philip S. Payne
Chairman and
Chief Financial Officer


May 9, 2005
#### § 1108.375 Technology investment agreement.

*Technology investment agreement* means one of a special class of assistance instruments used to increase involvement of commercial firms in defense research programs and for other purposes related to integration of the commercial and defense sectors of the nation's technology and industrial base. Technology investment agreements include one kind of cooperative agreement with provisions tailored for involving commercial firms, as well as one kind of assistance transaction other than a grant or cooperative agreement. Technology investment agreements are subject to, and described more fully in, 32 CFR part 37.
§ 200.409 Special considerations. In addition to the basic considerations regarding the allowability of costs highlighted in this subtitle, other subtitles in this part describe special considerations and requirements applicable to states, local governments, Indian tribes, and IHEs. In addition, certain provisions among the items of cost in this subpart are only applicable to certain types of non-Federal entities, as specified in the following sections: ( a ) Direct and Indirect (F&A) Costs (§§ 200.412-200.415) of this subpart;
( b ) Special Considerations for States, Local Governments and Indian Tribes (§§ 200.416 and 200.417) of this subpart; and
( c ) Special Considerations for Institutions of Higher Education (§§ 200.418 and 200.419) of this subpart.
[85 FR 49562, Aug. 13, 2020]
**UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE ANN ARBOR, MI 48105 - 2498 OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION **6 /**  **13 /13**  MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Test Procedure Meeting with th e Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and the Global Automakers FROM: Christopher Laroo TO: EPA Docket # EPA - HQ - OAR - 2009 - 0472 This memo documents a meeting held on 6 / 13 /13 between representatives of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, Global Automakers, an d EPA to discuss light - duty vehicle test procedures in 40 CFR parts 1065 and 1066 . The meeting attendees are enclosed. Th e discussion topics included testing on 4 wheel drive dy namometers, test fuel equivalency , R factor, and parts 1065/1066 .
###### Editorial Note on Part 107

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 107 appear at 81 FR 49895, July 29, 2016.

#### § 107.280 Records retention.

Each manufacturer of an infant formula shall make and retain such records respecting the distribution of the infant formula through any establishment owned or operated by such manufacturer as may be necessary to effect and monitor recalls of the formula. Such records shall be retained for at least 1 year after the expiration of the shelf life of the infant formula.

[54 FR 4008, Jan. 27, 1989, as amended at 67 FR 9585, Mar. 4, 2002]
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 798 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 798

    Recognizing and celebrating students who overcome immeasurable 
                    adversity to excel academically.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 4, 2006

 Mr. Fattah submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
              the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Recognizing and celebrating students who overcome immeasurable 
                    adversity to excel academically.

Whereas the United States of America was founded on the principles of fair 
        competition, collaboration, and equal opportunity;
Whereas the preparation of young people for success in the 21st century and 
        beyond is the primary objective of America's public education system;
Whereas a high-quality, highly competitive education for all students is 
        imperative for the economic growth and productivity of the United 
        States;
Whereas a well-educated populace is critical to the Nation's political and 
        economic well-being and national security;
Whereas all students in public elementary schools and secondary schools must 
        have access to an equitable and effective education in order to succeed;
Whereas students across America work hard every day, overcoming substantial 
        barriers to their academic achievement;
Whereas individuals, communities, schools, and families succeed in the face of 
        great odds to secure educational opportunity for American children; and
Whereas continued academic excellence in every community is vital to American 
        progress and global competitiveness: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) commends those students who have risen above the 
        obstacles to their success, both internal and external;
            (2) recognizes the contributions of families, schools, and 
        communities in student achievement;
            (3) encourages all students to continue to work hard and 
        strive for excellence;
            (4) congratulates Hollywood for meeting the challenge of 
        positively depicting young people in film; and
            (5) recognizes the talents of Laurence Fishburne, Angela 
        Bassett, Keke Palmer, and Doug Atchison for the portrayal of an 
        American educational success story in the newly released movie, 
        Akeela and the Bee.
                                 <all>
```
February 19, 2010 

ERRATA

The Fate, Transport, and Ecological Impacts of Airborne Contaminants in 

Western National Parks (USA) 

January 2008 

Western Airborne Contaminants Assessment Project Final Report 

Volume I 

Page 

Number Reference Correction 

2-23 Whole Fish Contaminant 

Concentrations for MORA; range of 

DDTs for Golden Lake 

Graph shows range of DDTs for Golden 

Lake from 2.6 ng/g wet weight to the 

maximum of the range from all the 

WACAP sites of 50.4 ng/g. The actual 

maximum of DDTs for Golden is 5.3 ng/g. 

2-33 Key to Secondary Park Summary 

pages, “Vegetation Contaminant 

Concentration” box in lower right, 

3rd and 4th lines from bottom (second 

to last sentence in box) 

g-HCH is a current-use pesticide, not a 

historic-use pesticide. Sentence should 

read: “SOCs are grouped by current-use 

pesticides (endosulfans, chlorpyrifos, 

dacthal, g-HCH), historic-use pesticides (aHCH, HCB), polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons (PAHs), and polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs).” 

3-16 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence “metrological” should be “meteorological” 

Volume II: Appendices 

Page 

Number Correction 

ii NPS WACAP website address for the online location of the WACAP Final Report: 

The “s” in “studies” should be a capital “S”; 

http://www.nature.nps.gov/air/Studies/air_toxics/wacap.cfm

3B-21 Last line in Table 3B-15; “refernce” should be “reference” 

4A-33 Appendix 4A.11: BAND line: “Bandolier” should be “Bandelier” 

Page 1 of 1
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS54026 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
Non-Speaker Sign-in 

Revised Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters 

Public Hearing 

· February 26, 2014 

Non-Speaker Sign-in Sheet 

$Lt( Cvv\'h_:j H-P 

~,Co!<..ci.E'\ \'l ~-rc<J"-,'.<:!:, ~j\P..U <:- Pr~0o.c:-., S:vt.c 

ShO\Y\1'\oYl .:J 

AVI:sVS1 ~\)N~ 

Joih\.QJL ~(~{\ r'{LCCcrJL OE"? 

~ ~ DfP 

~~ -cv; ~ 
~ '-

-): 

~ s 

0 i_ ,:1 '0 / / 

0 ~ c!:. 

~ \ \___! 

~ v '0 

~0 lA w "'S '-._) 

>- ~ ""' 

- J 1 s 

~ ,-- ~ a: ls,\ <.1 <:¥-. u 10' ~ 'Y v 

~ "" ~ V) J f ~ & )iJ. """"' ::t """ 2 .., .J' V' c.~~ J_ ~ 

rt '-t V" VI ~ 

G "' <:::) u 

2 

~ ~ 

., 

~ 42 

lJ '01 <1 

~ '"""""' I '::> ___., 

<±; 2; 

~ ., 

c 0 ~ w "i::: l 

c J pl.' M p ~ v; . 

- ~ 

~ --- "' ~ ti_ 

~ ______., 

"" <t. c:::..> "' <t Q) 

·~ -;n. __ .:z 

"' c ' 

0 

z 
Non-Speaker Sign-in 

Revised Standards of Performance for New Residential Wood Heaters 

Public Hearing 

February 26, 2014 

Non-Speaker Sign-in Sheet 

Mlct-lf\et.._ Tht-tM!NGiCl\1 INNovrrnvc ~/r=rr?-TH P@'D-(cT;s 

--:] uh rJ Ooh np/ jy Ei'ls i/Wf>V ( c:; rbCh scI (An (;I, I 

y i (VIe 1 t (. Thi lood. e & LC N a ssoE P 

It /l 

Marc Cah.e.-, 

j/Jwt-U-r. j;1}u_ fbor~ ~~ 

~~ !? /fAe /}!te4__ 

~ 

L-fAkW £lv7 c, ~-zs~ 
c 

., 

C. 

OJ) 

Vi 

~ 

~ 

"' 

= "' 

~ 0 

z 

) 

) 

) 

vv
#### Thomas J. Beardmore, Appellant, *v.*Elizabeth M. Barry, Respondent.

*Beardmore*v. *Barry,*118 App. Div. 334, affirmed.

(Argued October 21, 1908;

decided November 10, 1908.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 26, 1907, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court on trial at Special Term in an action to compel the specific performance of a contract to convey real estate.

*Saul E. Rogers*and *Gustavus A. Rogers*for appellant.

*Hugo Hirsh*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Yann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-1381
In Re: DALE E. HAMILTON, Debtor. In Re: CHARLENE S. HAMILTON, Debtor.

_________________________ DALE E. HAMILTON, Debtor - Appellant, versus GERALD M. O'DONNELL, Trustee - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CA-97-1735-A, BK-97-12554-MVB) Submitted: May 14, 1998 Decided: May 27, 1998 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2Dale E. Hamilton, Appellant Pro Se. Gerald M. O'Donnell, Alexandria, Virginia, Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals from the district court's orders (1) dismissing his appeal from the bankruptcy court's order dismissing,pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 1322(a)(6), 1325(a)(6) (1994), his petition filed under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code and (2) denying his motion for reconsideration. Our review of the record discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal Service TM                        .                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

Postal Service notice of filing of a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3).

# DATES:

January 4, 2011.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that on December 17, 2010, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Express Mail Contract 11 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *http://www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2011-14, CP2011-50.                

Neva R. Watson,

Attorney, Legislative.

[FR Doc. 2010-33162 Filed 1-3-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### § 429.10 Purpose and scope.

This subpart sets forth the procedures for manufacturers to certify that their covered products and covered equipment comply with the applicable energy conservation standards.
#### § 820.81 Amount of penalty.

Any person subject to a penalty under 42 U.S.C. 2282a shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed $255,964 for each such violation. If any violation under 42 U.S.C. 2282a is a continuing one, each day of such violation shall constitute a separate violation for the purpose of computing the applicable civil penalty.

[62 FR 46184, Sept. 2, 1997, as amended at 74 FR 66033, Dec. 14, 2009; 79 FR 19, Jan. 2, 2014; 81 FR 41794, June 28, 2016; 81 FR 96352, Dec. 30, 2016; 83 FR 1292, Jan. 11, 2018; 83 FR 66083, Dec. 26, 2018; 85 FR 830, Jan. 8, 2020; 86 FR 2956, Jan. 14, 2021; 87 FR 1064, Jan. 10, 2022; 88 FR 2193, Jan. 13, 2023; 89 FR 1029, Jan. 9, 2024]
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear at 68 FR 24879, May 9, 2003, and at 88 FR 45064, July 14, 2023.

§ 10.70 Documentation of significant decisions in administrative file. ( a ) This section applies to every significant FDA decision on any matter under the laws administered by the Commissioner, whether it is raised formally, for example, by a petition or informally, for example, by correspondence.
( b ) FDA employees responsible for handling a matter are responsible for insuring the completeness of the administrative file relating to it. The file must contain: ( 1 ) Appropriate documentation of the basis for the decision, including relevant evaluations, reviews, memoranda, letters, opinions of consultants, minutes of meetings, and other pertinent written documents; and
( 2 ) The recommendations and decisions of individual employees, including supervisory personnel, responsible for handling the matter. ( i ) The recommendations and decisions are to reveal significant controversies or differences of opinion and their resolution.
( ii ) An agency employee working on a matter and, consistent with the prompt completion of other assignments, an agency employee who has worked on a matter may record individual views on that matter in a written memorandum, which is to be placed in the file.
( c ) A written document placed in an administrative file must: ( 1 ) Relate to the factual, scientific, legal or related issues under consideration;
( 2 ) Be dated and signed by the author;
( 3 ) Be directed to the file, to appropriate supervisory personnel, and to other appropriate employees, and show all persons to whom copies were sent;
( 4 ) Avoid defamatory language, intemperate remarks, undocumented charges, or irrelevant matters (e.g., personnel complaints);
( 5 ) If it records the views, analyses, recommendations, or decisions of an agency employee in addition to the author, be given to the other employees; and
( 6 ) Once completed (i.e., typed in final form, dated, and signed) not be altered or removed. Later additions to or revisions of the document must be made in a new document.
( d ) Memoranda or other documents that are prepared by agency employees and are not in the administrative file have no status or effect.
( e ) FDA employees working on a matter have access to the administrative file on that matter, as appropriate for the conduct of their work. FDA employees who have worked on a matter have access to the administrative file on that matter so long as attention to their assignments is not impeded. Reasonable restrictions may be placed upon access to assure proper cataloging and storage of documents, the availability of the file to others, and the completeness of the file for review.
Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




     In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10- KSB of Embryo
Development  Corporation  for the year ended  April 30,  2004,  the  undersigned
hereby  certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-  Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and
belief, that:

     (1)  such  Annual  Report on Form  10-KSB for the year ended April 30, 2004
          fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
          Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  the information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the
          year ended April 30, 2004 fairly presents,  in all material  respects,
          the   financial   condition   and  results  of  operations  of  Embryo
          Development Corporation.


                       By: /s/ Matthew L. Harriton
                           -----------------------
                           Matthew L. Harriton
                         Chief Executive Officer
                         Chief Financial Officer
                            July 30, 2004





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

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7851

FRANK DOUGLAS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

TAMMY SCOTT, Bank Teller; FIRST CITIZENS BANK,

in Beech Island, South Carolina,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Columbia. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (CA02-2378)

Submitted: February 6, 2003 Decided: February 13, 2003

Before WILKINS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frank Douglas, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Frank Douglas appeals the district court’s order accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. See Douglas v. Scott, No. CA-02-2378 (D.S.C.

Nov. 6, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
79–008

106TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 106–681

PROVIDING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4201, THE

NONCOMMERCIAL BROADCASTING FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ACT OF 2000

JUNE 19, 2000.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. LINDER, from the Committee on Rules,

submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. Res. 527]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House

Resolution 527, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for the consideration in the House of

H.R. 4201, the Noncommercial Broadcasting Freedom of Expression

Act of 2000, under a modified closed rule. The rule provides one

hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and

ranking minority member of the Committee on Commerce.

The rule provides that the amendment recommended by the

Committee on Commerce now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted upon adoption of the resolution. The rule further

provides for consideration of the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the Congressional Record, if offered by Representative Markey or his designee, which shall be considered as

read and shall be debatable for one hour equally divided between

the proponent and an opponent.

Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Æ
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

RICHARD B. SANDOW, ESQ., JOHN P. 

CORCORAN, JR., ESQ., AND MICHAEL 

A. CARR, ESQ. T/D/B/A JONES, GREGG, 

CREEHAN, & GERACE, LLP,

Respondents

v.

RICHARD C. HVIZDAK,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 217 WAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 24th day of October, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.