alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1.4 Authority citations. ( a ) For each part of its regulations, the Food and Drug Administration includes a centralized citation of all of the statutory provisions that provide authority for any regulation that is included in that part.
( b ) The agency may rely on any one or more of the authorities that are listed for a particular part in implementing or enforcing any section in that part.
( c ) All citations of authority in this chapter will list the applicable sections in the organic statute if the statute is the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Public Health Service Act, or the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act. References to an act or a section thereof include references to amendments to that act or section. These citations will also list the corresponding United States Code (U.S.C.) sections. For example, a citation to section 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act would be listed: Sec. 701 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 371).
( d ) If the organic statute is one other than those specified in paragraph (c) of this section, the citations of authority in this chapter generally will list only the applicable U.S.C. sections. For example, a citation to section 552 of the Administrative Procedure Act would be listed: 5 U.S.C. 552. The agency may, where it determines that such measures are in the interest of clarity and public understanding, list the applicable sections in the organic statute and the corresponding U.S.C. section in the same manner set out in paragraph (c) of this section. References to an act or a section thereof include references to amendments to that act or section.
( e ) Where there is no U.S.C. provision, the agency will include a citation to the U.S. Statutes at Large. Citations to the U.S. Statutes at Large will refer to volume and page.
( f ) The authority citations will include a citation to executive delegations (i.e., Executive Orders), if any, necessary to link the statutory authority to the agency.
[54 FR 39630, Sept. 27, 1989]
§ 163.5 Methods of analysis. Shell and cacao fat content in cacao products shall be determined by the following methods of analysis prescribed in “Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists,” which are incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from the AOAC INTERNATIONAL, 481 North Frederick Ave., suite 500, Gaithersburg, MD 20877, or may be examined at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .* ( a ) Shell content—12th ed. (1975), methods 13.010-13.014, under the heading “Shell in Cacao Nibs—Official Final Action,” pp. 208-210.
( b ) Fat content—15th ed. (1990), method 963.15, under the heading “Fat in Cacao Products—Soxhlet Extraction Method—Final Action, 1973,” pp. 770-771.
[58 FR 29529, May 21, 1993, as amended at 63 FR 14035, Mar. 24, 1998]
#### § 111.135 What quality control operations are required for product complaints?

Quality control operations for product complaints must include reviewing and approving decisions about whether to investigate a product complaint and reviewing and approving the findings and followup action of any investigation performed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      12,018,577
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         500,000
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            10,670,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      39,853,764
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        40,011,364
<LOANS>                                    137,321,124
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,503,501
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             204,589,452
<DEPOSITS>                                 180,831,964
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          1,583,864
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,276
<OTHER-SE>                                  22,158,348
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             204,589,452
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             10,010,745
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            2,127,351
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            12,138,096
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           4,110,263
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,110,263
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        8,027,833
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  185,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              3,052,020
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,571,103
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   5,571,103
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,576,427
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.63
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.49
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.56
<LOANS-NON>                                     30,742
<LOANS-PAST>                                    76,921
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                66,959
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             2,330,733
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   17,471
<RECOVERIES>                                     5,239
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,503,501
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           232,000
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                      2,271,501
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-K
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,065
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,517
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          89,869
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,348
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,394,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        390,042
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       118,668
<OTHER-SE>                                     845,613
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,394,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               219,834
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  130,794
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                53,481
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,051
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (165,303)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (44,954)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (120,349)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (120,349)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.04)
        

</TABLE>
#### ALEXANDER v. PAGE et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

December 4, 1914.)

Insurance (§ 776*)—Mutual Benefit Insurance—By-Laws.

Where the by-laws of defendant lodge provided for the payment of a death benefit to the widow or beneficiary of members, such by-laws constituted a binding contract between the lodge and its members; and the administrator of a member, who diéd leaving neither widow nor beneficiary, cannot recover the benefit.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Insurance, Cent. Dig. §§ 1942, 1913; Dec. Dig. § 776.*]

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Seventh District.

Action by Samuel Alexander, as administrator, against Joseph.Page, as president of Hamilton Dodge, and others. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Reversed, and judgment entered for defendants.

Argued October term, 1914, before SEABURY, BIJUR, and COHALAN, JJ.

Wilford H. Smith, of New York City, for appellants.

Louis A. Leavelle, of New York City, for respondent.

*

For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

COHALAN, J.

The action was brought to recover $100 alleged to be due the plaintiff by reason of the membership of a decedent in the defendant lodge. Death benefits are paid under the provision’s of the following by-law:

> “One year’s membership and the payments for all dues, taxes, and fines having occurred against him, in the event of death, his widow or beneficiary may receive as a death benefit the sum of $100.”

The case was heard on the pleadings and the by-laws, as a matter of law, and no evidence was introduced except a copy of the defendants’ by-laws. The plaintiff sued as an administrator of the estate of the decedent. It appears that he was an uncle of the deceased member. As a matter of law, on the allegations of the pleadings and under the by-laws of the defendant lodge, we do not see how he is entitled to recover. The by-laws specifically state that no recovery may be had except by the widow or the beneficiary of a deceased member. Concededly, the plaintiff’s intestate neither left a widow nor named a beneficiary. The by-laws are a binding contract between the lodge and its members. Hellenberg v. Ind. Order of B’nai Berith, 94 N. Y. 580; Hess v. Johnson, 41 App. Div. 465, 58 N. Y. Supp. 983.

The judgment appealed from should be reversed, with costs, and judgment entered for the defendant on the pleadings, with costs. All concur.
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1316 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide for a one-year extension 

of the suicide prevention and resilience program for the National Guard 

and Reserves. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 8, 2017 

Mrs. ERNST (for herself and Mr. TESTER) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide for a 

one-year extension of the suicide prevention and resilience program for the National Guard and Reserves. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF SUICIDE PREVEN4 TION AND RESILIENCE PROGRAM FOR THE 

5 NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVES. 

6 Section 10219(g) of title 10, United States Code, is 

7 amended by striking ‘‘October 1, 2018’’ and inserting 

8 ‘‘October 1, 2019’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
Editorial Note on Part 72
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 72 appear at 80 FR 74981, Dec. 1, 2015, and at 81 FR 86910, Dec. 2, 2016.

§ 72.9 Information collection requirements: OMB approval. ( a ) The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has submitted the information collection requirements contained in this part to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.*). OMB has approved the information collection requirements contained in this part under control number 3150-0132.
( b ) The approved information collection requirements contained in this part appear in §§ 72.7, 72.11, 72.16, 72.22 through 72.34, 72.42, 72.44, 72.48 through 72.56, 72.62, 72.70, through 72.80, 72.90, 72.92, 72.94, 72.98, 72.100, 72.102, 72.103, 72.104, 72.108, 72.120, 72.126, 72.140 through 72.176, 72.180 through 72.186, 72.192, 72.206, 72.212, 72.218, 72.230, 72.232, 72.234, 72.236, 72.240, 72.242, 72.244, 72.248.
( c ) In § 72.79, Form N-71 and associated forms are approved under control number 3150-0056, and DOC/IAEA Design Information Questionnaire forms, NRC Forms AP-1, AP-A, and associated forms are approved under control number 0694-0135.
[64 FR 56122, Oct. 15, 1999, as amended at 67 FR 67101, Nov. 4, 2002; 68 FR 54149, Sept. 16, 2003; 73 FR 78607, Dec. 23, 2008; 77 FR 39909, July 6, 2012; 85 FR 65663, Oct. 16, 2020]
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 865 

Honoring Tracy K. Smith for her selection by the Librarian of Congress 

as the 22d Poet Laureate of the United States and recognizing her 

great accomplishments. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 27, 2018 

Mr. TAKANO (for himself, Mr. LANGEVIN, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. SCHIFF, Ms. 

MOORE, Mr. NADLER, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. MCNERNEY, and Mr. SMITH

of Washington) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 

the Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Honoring Tracy K. Smith for her selection by the Librarian 

of Congress as the 22d Poet Laureate of the United 

States and recognizing her great accomplishments. 

Whereas Tracy K. Smith was born April 16, 1972, in Falmouth, Massachusetts, and raised in Fairfield, California; 

Whereas Tracy K. Smith earned a B.A. in English and 

American Literature and Afro-American studies from 

Harvard College in 1994; 

Whereas Tracy K. Smith earned a M.F.A. in creative writing 

from Columbia University in 1997; 

Whereas Tracy K. Smith is the author of four books of poetry and one of book of prose: ‘‘The Body’s Question’’ 


amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 865 IH 

(2003), ‘‘Duende’’ (2007), ‘‘Life on Mars’’ (2011), ‘‘Ordinary Light’’ (2016), and ‘‘Wade in the Water’’ (2018); 

Whereas Tracy K. Smith has received numerous awards, fellowships, and other gestures of recognition, including the 

Cave Canem Poetry Prize, Rona Jaffe Foundation Writer’s Award, Mrs. Giles Whiting Foundation Writer’s 

Award, James Laughlin Award of the Academy of American Poets, Essence Magazine Literary Award, Pulitzer 

Prize for Poetry, Academy Fellowship of the Academy of 

American Poets, Robert Creeley Award, and Columbia 

University’s Medal for Excellence; 

Whereas Tracy K. Smith has taught at Marymount Manhattan College, Medgar Evers College of the City University 

of New York, University of Pittsburgh, Columbia University, Bennington College, Bread Load School of English, 

and currently teaches at Princeton University, serving as 

Director of the Creative Writing Program; 

Whereas Tracy K. Smith was twice appointed as Poet Laureate of the United States by the Librarian of Congress, 

Carla Hayden, for the 2017–2018 and 2018–2019 terms, 

respectively; and 

Whereas Tracy K. Smith said that ‘‘Poetry tells us that the 

world is full of wonder, revelation, consolation, and meaning.’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) honors Tracy K. Smith for her selection by 

3 the Librarian of Congress as the 22d Poet Laureate 

4 of the United States; 

5 (2) recognizes the accomplishments of Tracy K. 

6 Smith; and 


amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 865 IH 

1 (3) encourages the people of the United States 

2 to explore the impact that the creative arts and po3 etry has in their daily lives. 

Æ 


amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with BILLS
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50590

Conference Calendar

JUAN RUDY ENRIQUEZ

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

A M STRINGFELLOW; JAMES PAUL KIEL, JR

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:02-CV-261

Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan Rudy Enriquez, Texas prisoner # 227122, has appealed the district

court’s order denying his FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b) motion for relief from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. In his § 1983

complaint, Enriquez challenged the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles’

procedures on due process and equal protection grounds. The district court

dismissed Enriquez’s complaint. Enriquez timely appealed to this court, but

thereafter, in November 2003, this court affirmed the district court’s judgment.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 24, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 06-50590

2

Enriquez’s instant Rule 60(b) motion was filed in March 2006. In that

motion, Enriquez asserted that newly discovered evidence proved that the

district court’s judgment was manifestly unjust, that it was obtained through

fraud, and that it had been satisfied. To the extent that Enriquez’s motion was

brought pursuant to Rule 60(b)(2) and (3), the district court found that the

motion was time-barred. To the extent that Enriquez brought his motion under

Rule 60(b)(5), the district court denied the motion on the grounds that the

grounds for relief raised therein had previously been visited and decided on

appeal by this court. Enriquez timely appealed the denial of his Rule 60(b)

motion.

Enriquez contends that, since his fraud claim is based on the premise that

there was a fraud perpetrated upon the court, it cannot be time-barred. His

allegations do not rise to the type of egregious behavior that would warrant relief

under Rule 60(b) for fraud upon the court. See Wilson v. Johns-Manville Sales

Corp., 873 F.2d 869, 872 (5th Cir. 1989). To the extent that Enriquez uses the

term “manifestly unjust” to invoke the “catch-all” provision of Rule 60(b)(6), he

has not shown extraordinary circumstances justifying relief from the judgment.

See Bailey v. Ryan Stevedoring Co., Inc., 894 F.2d 157, 160 (5th Cir. 1990). 

Contrary to Enriquez’s assertions, the Supreme Court decision in

Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 78-83 (2005), has no bearing on Enriquez’s

case. Moreover, to the extent that Enriquez reiterates the arguments raised in

his § 1983 complaint, those arguments are not properly before the court. See

Williams v. Chater, 87 F.3d 702, 705 (5th Cir. 1996).

Enriquez has not shown that the district court abused its discretion in

denying his Rule 60(b) motion. See Gov’t Fin. Servs. One Ltd. P’ship v. Peyton

Place, Inc., 62 F.3d 767, 770 (5th Cir. 1995). The district court’s order is

therefore AFFIRMED.
#### § 1311.02 Definitions.

Any term contained in this part shall have the definition set forth in section 102 of the Act (21 U.S.C. 802) or part 1300 of this chapter.

[75 FR 16310, Mar. 31, 2010]
| **Name**                                                 |   | **Jurisdiction**           |
|----------------------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------|
| Level                8 Technologies, Inc.                |   | Delaware                   |
| Cicero                Technologies, Inc,                 |   | Delaware                   |
| Template                Software de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. |   | Mexico                     |
| Level                8 Systems Australia Pty Ltd         |   | Australia                  |
| Template                Software Holding GmbH            |   | Germany                    |
| Template                SoftwareGeschaftsfuhrungs GmbH   |   | Germany                    |
| Template                Software GmbH                    |   | Germany                    |
| Level                8 Worldwide Holdings Ltd            |   | Delaware                   |
| Seer                Technologies de Argentina S.A        |   | Argentina                  |
| Level                8 FSC, Inc                          |   | Barbados                   |
| Level                8 Benelux B.V                       |   | Netherlands                |
| Seer                Technologies do Brasil Ltd.          |   | Brazil                     |
| Level                8 Canada, Inc                       |   | Canada                     |
| Level                8 Europe (Deutschland) GmbH         |   | Germany                    |
| Level                8 Ireland Limited                   |   | Ireland                    |
| Level                8 Italia S.R.L.                     |   | Italy                      |
| Level                8 Systems Nordic AB                 |   | Sweden                     |
| Seer                Korea Co., Limited                   |   | South                Korea |
| Seer                Technologies Singapore PTY, Limited  |   | Singapore                  |
| Seer                Technologies Hong Kong Limited       |   | Hong                Kong   |
| 3020126                Canada, Inc. (fka Bizware)        |   | Canada                     |
|                                                     |   |                       |
U.S. Department of Labor
Amendment to Employment Agreement for David S. Borror



 Exhibit 10.2 
 AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 This Amendment to Employment Agreement is entered into this
2nd day of August, 2006, by and between Dominion Homes, Inc. (hereinafter called the “Company”) and David
S. Borror (hereinafter called the “Executive”). 
 WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive previously entered into an
employment agreement, effective July 1, 2004 (the “Agreement”). 
 WHEREAS, in light of current business conditions
affecting the Company, Executive has offered to take a temporary reduction in annual base salary effective August 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006, and the Company has accepted this offer. 
 WHEREAS, the Company and Executive desire to amend the Agreement to reflect this change, as set forth herein. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, and in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the adequacy of which is agreed to by the parties, the Company and
the Executive hereby mutually agree as follows: 
 1. The first sentence of Paragraph 3, Compensation, of the Agreement, shall be deleted in
its entirety and replaced with the following: 
 “For such services, Executive shall receive an annual base salary of Two Hundred Fifty
Thousand Dollars ($250,000), which may be increased, but not decreased without the Executive’s written consent, by the Committee during the term of this Agreement; provided, however, that effective from August 1, 2006 to December 31,
2006, and subject to further extension at the Executive’s discretion, Executive shall receive an annual base salary of One Hundred Twenty Five Thousand Dollars ($125,000). 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed and delivered this Amendment to Employment Agreement as of the date set forth above. 
  

					
	EXECUTIVE	 		 	DOMINION HOMES, INC.
			
	 /s/ David S. Borror
	 		 	 /s/ Christine A. Murry

	David S. Borror	 		 	Christine A. Murry,
		 		 	Vice President, Corporate Counsel and Secretary