alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1114.35 Withdrawal of a marketing granted order. ( a ) *Grounds for withdrawal.* FDA will withdraw a marketing granted order for a new tobacco product issued under this part if FDA determines that: ( 1 ) Any of the grounds for withdrawal under section 910(d)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act apply; or
( 2 ) Any postmarket requirement imposed by the marketing granted order or by this part has not been met, which results in FDA finding that one or more of the grounds for withdrawal specified in section 910(d)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act apply.
( b ) *Advice and other information.* ( 1 ) FDA may seek advice on scientific matters from any appropriate FDA advisory committee in deciding whether to withdraw a marketing granted order.
( 2 ) FDA may use information other than that submitted by the applicant in deciding whether to withdraw a marketing granted order.
( c ) *Informal hearing.* Prior to withdrawing a marketing granted order, FDA will offer the holder of the marketing granted order an opportunity for an informal hearing under part 16 of this chapter.
( d ) *Order issuance.* If the applicant does not request a hearing or, if after the part 16 hearing is held, the Agency decides to proceed with the withdrawal, FDA will issue to the holder of the marketing granted order an order withdrawing the marketing granted order for the new tobacco product.
( e ) *Public notice.* FDA will give the public notice of an order withdrawing a marketing granted order for a tobacco product and will announce the basis of the withdrawal.
§ 1.509 How must the importer be identified at entry? ( a ) You must ensure that, for each line entry of food product offered for importation into the United States, your name, electronic mail address, and unique facility identifier recognized as acceptable by FDA, identifying you as the importer of the food, are provided electronically when filing entry with U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
( b ) Before an article of food is imported or offered for import into the United States, the foreign owner or consignee of the food (if there is no U.S. owner or consignee) must designate a U.S. agent or representative as the importer of the food for the purposes of the definition of “importer” in § 1.500.
#### § 780.40 Filing of application.

An application to the Department, pursuant to section 153c of the Act, for the issuance of a license to use the invention or discovery covered by a patent useful in the production or utilization of special nuclear material or atomic energy shall be filed with the Board in accordance with requirements of § 780.5.
#### § 1.632 What is the duration of recognition?

FDA may grant recognition of an accreditation body for a period not to exceed 5 years from the date of recognition.
§ 950.34 Final claim determination. ( a ) If the parties reach a Final Claim Determination through mediation, or Summary Binding Decision as set forth in this subpart, the Final Claim Determination is a final settlement of the issue, made by the sponsor and the Program Administrator.
( b ) The parties agree that no appeal shall be taken or further review sought and that the Final Claim Determination is final, conclusive, non-appealable, and may not be set aside, except for fraud.
#### In re MAGINNIS.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division First Department.

December 11, 1914.)

In the matter of William H. Maginnis.

No opinion. Respondent disbarred. Settle order on notice.
```

[108th Congress Public Law 260]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ260.108]

[[Page 118 STAT. 694]]

Public Law 108-260
108th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
   122 West Elwood Avenue in Raeford, North Carolina, as the ``Bobby 
 Marshall Gentry Post Office Building''. <<NOTE: June 25, 2004 -  [H.R. 
                                4176]>> 

    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 122 West 
Elwood Avenue in Raeford, North Carolina, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Bobby Marshall Gentry 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 ``Bobby Marshall Gentry Post 
Office Building''.

    Approved June 25, 2004.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4176:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):
            May 17, 18, considered and passed House.
            June 9, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Keith R. Phillips, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Wellman, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internalcontrol over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Designed such internal control over financialreporting, or caused such internal control overfinancial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assurance regardingthe reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect theregistrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theregistrant’s board of directors: a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.        Date   August 7, 2006 By:  /s/Keith R. Phillips   Chief Financial Officer
Editorial Note on Part 9
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 9 appear at 82 FR 52825, Nov. 15, 2017.

§ 9.53 Requests; how and where presented. ( a ) Requests may be made in person or in writing. Assistance regarding equests or other matters relating to the Privacy Act of 1974 may be obtained by writing to the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Officer, by an appropriate method listed in § 9.6. Requests relating to records in multiple systems of records should be made to the same Officer. That Officer shall assist the requestor in identifying his or her request more precisely and shall be responsible for forwarding the request to the appropriate system manager.
( b ) All written requests must be made to the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and sent by an appropriate method listed in § 9.6, and should clearly state on the envelope and in the letter, as appropriate: “Privacy Act Request,” “Privacy Act Disclosure Accounting Request,” “Privacy Act Correction Request.” The NRC does not consider a request received until the date it is actually received by the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Officer.
( c ) Requests may be made in person during official hours at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission office where the record is located, as listed in the “Notice of System of Records” for the system in which the record is contained.
[40 FR 44484, Sept. 26, 1975, as amended at 41 FR 20645, May 20, 1976; 52 FR 31609, Aug. 21, 1987; 54 FR 53316, Dec. 28, 1989; 63 FR 15743, Apr. 1, 1998; 68 FR 58800, Oct. 10, 2003; 70 FR 34308, June 14, 2005]
|Open-File Report 97-745

1997
|-------------------------------





---



Response to possible slope failure in the San Francisco Bay area is aided
by digital maps of topography, landslides, and rainfall thresholds, together
with data from the National Weather Service and the State Office of Emergency
Services.  The data are available for the entire region as well as by 
county.  The San Francisco Bay Region Landslide Folio comprises six 
separate
but related reports keyed by letter to the same Open-file Report number
as follows:

- 97-745 A. Introduction to the San Francisco Bay Region, California,
   Landslide Folio - by the San Francisco Bay Landslide Mapping Team
   View Introduction as PDF file: sfbrlsf-db.pdfDownload Introduction as text file: sfbrlsf-db.txt
     (37KB)Download Introduction as Postscript file: sfbrlsf-db.ps.gz
     (600KB compressed, 1.5MB after uncompression)
- View Introduction as PDF file: sfbrlsf-db.pdf
- Download Introduction as text file: sfbrlsf-db.txt
     (37KB)
- Download Introduction as Postscript file: sfbrlsf-db.ps.gz
     (600KB compressed, 1.5MB after uncompression)
- 97-745
   B. Shaded Relief Map of the San Francisco Bay Region, California
   - by Scott E. Graham and Richard J. Pike
- 97-745
   C. Summary Distribution of Slides and Earth Flows in the San Francisco
   Bay Region, California - by Carl M. Wentworth, Scott E. Graham, Richard
   J. Pike, Gregg S. Beukelman, David W. Ramsey, and Andrew D. Barron
   *NOTE Part C - Summary distribution of slides and earthflows
in the San Francisco Bay Region was updated on Feb. 17, 1998*
- 97-745
   D. Index to Detailed Maps of Landslides in the San Francisco Bay
   Region, California - by Richard J. Pike
*NOTE Part D - Index to Detailed Maps of Landslides in the San 
Francisco Bay
   Region, California was updated on Sept. 22, 1999*
- 97-745
   E. Map Showing Principal Debris-Flow Source Areas in the
   San Francisco Bay Region, California - by Stephen D. Ellen, Robert
   K. Mark, Gerald F. Wieczorek, Carl M. Wentworth, David W. Ramsey, and Thomas
   E. May
- 97-745
   F. Map of Rainfall Thresholds for Debris Flows in the San
   Francisco Bay Region, California - by Raymond C. Wilson and Angela
   S. Jayko



---

Related USGS pages:

- Potential 
San Francisco
   Bay Landslides During El Niño
- Geologic mapping
   and El Nino
- USGS El Niño 
Home Page

---

| | For more information on the geology
of the San Francisco Bay region:
Visit the sfgeo website
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

Note the disclaimers.

Return to WRGIS Home Page Return to WRGIS Home 
Page
# L_2014367EN.01012601.xml

| 23.12.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 367/126 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.12.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 367/126

---

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code

(
  Official Journal of the European Communities L 302 of 19 October 1992
  )

On page 32, in Article 166, point (a), first line:

for:

‘Community goods are considered, ...’,

read:

‘Non-Community goods are considered, ...’.

---
#### NEW YORK CONSOLIDATED R. CO., Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK. Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

November 27, 1914.)

Action by the New York Consolidated Railroad Company against the City of New York.

PER CURIAM.

Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with $10 costs, on the ground that it does not affirmatively appear that an examination of an account is involved.

RICH, J., dissents.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-21-00056-CV

In re Wesley Perkins

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The petition for writ of mandamus, emergency motion to abate, and emergency 

motion to stay are denied. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

__________________________________________

Chari L. Kelly, Justice

Before Justices Goodwin, Triana, and Kelly

Filed: February 5, 2021
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

       CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF
                         THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         I, Kathleen A. Bayless, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Komag, Incorporated;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial
information included in this report fairly present, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a - 15(e) and 15d - 15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors:

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize, and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.

DATE: May 11, 2004             BY: /s/ Kathleen A. Bayless
                                   -----------------------------------

                               Kathleen A. Bayless
                               Chief Financial Officer
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-3615

___________________________

Lisa A. Biron

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Michael D. Carvajal, Director Federal Bureau of Prisons, sued in their official

capacity; FCI Waseca Warden Mistelle Starr, sued in their official capacity;

Deanna Hiller, FCI Waseca Unit Manager; sued in her individual and official capacities

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota

 ____________

 Submitted: June 21, 2022

Filed: June 24, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.
Federal inmate Lisa Biron appeals the district court’s1

 dismissal of her pro se

complaint raising claims that Bureau of Prisons (BOP) officials denied her access to

the courts, and violated the Administrative Procedures Act by failing to follow BOP

regulations. Following a careful review, we conclude that the district court did not

err in dismissing the case. See Plymouth Cty. v. Merscorp, Inc., 774 F.3d 1155, 1158

(8th Cir. 2014) (reviewing dimissal de novo). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir.

R. 47B.

______________________________

1The Honorable Wilhelmina M. Wright, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable

Elizabeth Cowan Wright, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of

Minnesota.

-2-
# EUR-Lex - 31992D0480 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31992D0480

**92/480/EEC: Commission Decision of 21 September 1992 approving the plan for the approval of establishments for the purposes of intra-Community trade in poultry and hatching eggs submitted by Italy (Only the Italian text is authentic) **

*
Official Journal L 284 , 29/09/1992 P. 0027 - 0027 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 21 September 1992 approving the plan for the approval of establishments for the purposes of intra-Community trade in poultry and hatching eggs submitted by Italy (Only the Italian text is authentic) (92/480/EEC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 90/539/EEC of 15 October 1990 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in, and imports from third countries of, poultry and hatching eggs (1), as amended by Directive 91/496/EEC (2), and in particular Article 3 (2) thereof,

Whereas by letter dated 11 June 1992 Italy transmitted a plan to the Commission;

Whereas the plan has been examined and found to meet the requirements of Directive 90/539/EEC, and in particular Annex II thereof;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The plan submitted by Italy for the approval of establishments for the purposes of intra-Community trade in poultry and hatching eggs is hereby approved.

Article 2

Italy shall bring into force by 1 September 1992 the laws, regulations and administrative provisions for implementation of the plan referred to in Article 1.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to Italy. Done at Brussels, 21 September 1992. For the Commission

Ray MAC SHARRY

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 303, 31. 10. 1990, p. 6. (2) OJ No L 268, 24. 9. 1991, p. 56.
Exhibit 99.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
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 Quarterly Report of Wellman, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas M. Duff, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The Report 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



By /s/ Thomas M. Duff_________________

Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 896 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 896

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         June 29, 2006.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order 
without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the 
resolution (H. Res. 895) supporting intelligence and law enforcement programs to 
track terrorists and terrorist finances conducted consistent with Federal law 
and with appropriate Congressional consultation and specifically condemning the 
disclosure and publication of classified information that impairs the 
international fight against terrorism and needlessly exposes Americans to the 
threat of further terror attacks by revealing a crucial method by which 
terrorists are traced through their finances. The resolution shall be considered 
as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the resolution 
and preamble to final adoption without intervening motion or demand for division 
of the question except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by 
the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services; 
and (2) one motion to recommit which may not instructions.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 102

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 102 appear at 81 FR 49895, July 29, 2016.

#### § 102.47 Bonito.

“Bonito” or “bonito fish” is the common or usual name of the following food fishes:

*Cybiosarda elegans* (Whitely, 1935)—Leaping bonito

*Gymnosarda unicolor* (Ruppell, 1838)—Dogtooth tuna

*Orcynopsis unicolor* (Geoffroy St. Hilaire, 1817)—Plain bonito

*Sarda australis* (Macleay, 1880)—Australian bonito

*Sarda chiliensis* (Cuvier, 1831)—Eastern Pacific bonito

*Sarda orientalis* (Temminck and Schlegel, 1844)—Striped bonito

*Sarda sarda* (Bloch, 1793)—Atlantic bonito

[55 FR 45797, Oct. 31, 1990]