alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1105.10 Refusal to accept a premarket submission. ( a ) FDA will refuse to accept for review, as soon as practicable, a premarket tobacco product application, modified risk tobacco product application, substantial equivalence application, or exemption request or subsequent abbreviated report for the following reasons, if applicable: ( 1 ) The submission does not pertain to a tobacco product as defined in 21 U.S.C. 321(rr).
( 2 ) The submission is not in English or does not contain complete English translations of any information submitted within.
( 3 ) If submitted in an electronic format, the submission is in a format that FDA cannot process, read, review, and archive.
( 4 ) The submission does not contain contact information, including the applicant's name and address.
( 5 ) The submission is from a foreign applicant and does not identify an authorized U.S. agent, including the agent's name and address, for the submission.
( 6 ) The submission does not contain a required FDA form(s).
( 7 ) The submission does not contain the following product-identifying information: The manufacturer of the tobacco product; the product name, including the brand and subbrand; the product category and subcategory; package type and package quantity; and characterizing flavor.
( 8 ) The type of submission is not specified.
( 9 ) The submission does not contain a signature of a responsible official, authorized to represent the applicant, who either resides in or has a place of business in the United States.
( 10 ) For premarket tobacco applications, modified risk tobacco product applications, substantial equivalence applications, and exemption requests only: The submission does not include a valid claim of categorical exclusion in accordance with part 25 of this chapter, or an environmental assessment.
( b ) If FDA finds that none of the reasons in paragraph (a) of this section exists for refusing to accept a premarket submission, FDA may accept the submission for processing and further review. FDA will send to the submitter an acknowledgement letter stating the submission has been accepted for processing and further review and will provide the premarket submission tracking number.
( c ) If FDA finds that any of the reasons in paragraph (a) of this section exist for refusing to accept the submission, FDA will notify the submitter in writing of the reason(s) and that the submission has not been accepted, unless insufficient contact information was provided.
§ 160.115 Liquid eggs. ( a ) Liquid eggs, mixed eggs, liquid whole eggs, mixed whole eggs are eggs of the domestic hen broken from the shells and with yolks and whites in their natural proportion as so broken. They may be mixed, or mixed and strained, and they are pasteurized or otherwise treated to destroy all viable *Salmonella* microorganisms. Pasteurization or such other treatment is deemed to permit the adding of safe and suitable substances (other than chemical preservatives) that are essential to the method of pasteurization or other treatment used. For the purposes of this paragraph, safe and suitable substances are those that perform a useful function in the pasteurization or other treatment to render the liquid eggs free of viable *Salmonella* microorganisms, and that are not food additives as defined in section 201(s) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; or, if they are food additives, they are used in conformity with regulations established pursuant to section 409 of the act.
( b ) *Label declaration.* Each of the ingredients used in the food shall be declared on the label as required by the applicable sections of parts 101 and 130 of this chapter.
[42 FR 14462, Mar. 15, 1977, as amended at 58 FR 2883, Jan. 6, 1993]
Editorial Note on Part 177
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 177 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996; 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 70 FR 72074, Dec. 1, 2005; and 81 FR 49896, July 29, 2016.

§ 177.1556 Polyaryletherketone resins. The poly(oxy-1,4-phenylenecarbonyl-1,4-phenyleneoxy-1,4-phenylenecarbonyl-1,4-phenylenecarbonyl-1,4-phenylene) resins (CAS Reg. No. 55088-54-5 and CAS Reg. No. 60015-05-6 and commonly referred to as polyaryletherketone resins) identified in paragraph (a) of this section may be safely used as articles or components of articles intended for repeated use in contact with food, subject to the provisions of this section. ( a ) *Identity.* Polyaryletherketone resins consist of basic resins produced by reacting 4,4′-diphenoxy benzophenone and terephthaloyl dichloride in such a way that the finished resins have a minimum weight average molecular weight of 20,000 grams per mole, as determined by light scattering measurements in sulfuric acid at room temperature.
( b ) *Optional adjuvant substances.* The basic polyaryletherketone resins identified in paragraph (a) of this section may contain optional adjuvant substances required in the production of such basic resins. These adjuvants may include substances used in accordance with § 174.5 of this chapter and the following: ( 1 ) Benzoyl chloride, poly(tetrafluoro ethylene).
( 2 ) [Reserved]
( c ) *Extractive limitations.* The finished food-contact article yields net total extractives in each extracting solvent not to exceed 0.052 milligram per square inch (corresponding to 0.008 milligram per square centimeter) of food-contact surface, when extracted at reflux temperature for 2 hours with the following solvents: Distilled water, 50 percent (by volume) ethyl alcohol in distilled water, 3 percent acetic acid (by weight) in distilled water, and *n*-heptane.
( d ) In testing the finished food-contact article made of polyaryletherketone resin, use a separate test sample for each required extracting solvent.
[61 FR 42381, Aug. 15, 1996]
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****National counterintelligencestrategy of the United States of America.**
 
SuDoc Number:PREX 28.17/3:
Item Number:0857-T-07 (online)
CGP systemNumber:001095225
 
2016 | 2018-22 | 2020-22
 
February 21, 2020
#### Downloading Forms Notification

In order to access a form you **MUST** select the form name and then select the Save link as... to save it to your documents folder. Then edit from there.

The FMLA entitles eligible employees of covered employers to take unpaid, job-protected leave for specified family and medical reasons with continuation of group health insurance coverage under the same terms and conditions as if the employee had not taken leave. Eligible employees are entitled to:
                              - Twelve workweeks of leave in a 12-month period for:                                 - the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within one year of birth;
                                - the placement with the employee of a child for adoption or foster care and to care for the newly placed child within one year of placement;
                                - to care for the employee’s spouse, child, or parent who has a serious health condition;
                                - a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the essential functions of his or her job;
                                - any qualifying exigency arising out of the fact that the employee’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent is a covered military member on “covered active duty;” or
                              - Twenty-six work weeks of leave during a single 12-month period to care for a covered servicemember with a serious injury or illness if the eligible employee is the servicemember’s spouse, son, daughter, parent, or next of kin (military caregiver leave).

 
                              - General Guidance
Guidance materials about the FMLA, including guides for both employers and employees, an employee guide to military leave, Qs & As, mini cards, and more.
Learn More about General Guidance for FMLA
                              - Fact Sheets
Learn more by reading fact sheets that cover a variety of FMLA topics.
Learn More about Fact Sheets for FMLA
                              - Forms
Access FMLA Forms.
Learn More about Forms for FMLA
                              - Other Resources
Access interactive online tools, posters, and presentations about the FMLA.
Learn More about Other Resources for FMLA
                              - Interpretive Guidance
Review Administrator Interpretations, Opinion and Ruling Letters as well as chapters of the WHD Field Operations Handbook.
Learn More about Interpretive Guidance for FMLA
                              - Laws and Regulations
Review the FMLA laws and regulations.
Learn More about Laws and Regulations for FMLA

### Quick Links

FMLA Posters

FMLA Frequently Asked Questions

Break Time for Nursing Mothers

Mental Health and the FMLA

Cancer and the FMLA

Maternal Health

30 Years of FMLA
Editorial Note on Part 180
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 180 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 180.820 How much time do I have to contest a proposed debarment? ( a ) As a respondent you or your representative must either send, or make arrangements to appear and present, the information and argument to the debarring official within 30 days after you receive the Notice of Proposed Debarment.
( b ) The Federal agency taking the action considers the Notice of Proposed Debarment to be received by you— ( 1 ) When delivered, if the agency mails the notice to the last known street address, or five days after the agency sends it if the letter is undeliverable;
( 2 ) When sent, if the agency sends the notice by facsimile or five days after the agency sends it if the facsimile is undeliverable; or
( 3 ) When delivered, if the agency sends the notice by e-mail or five days after the agency sends it if the e-mail is undeliverable.
## duat/zr // , -2o/& 706 "f J t^o/j^T £/? ^7^JMJA7A/L /tT^^ALS

' ~ '• . :!!15



### <t*&lA7Ar &,y jC&t? &s7&> -rj^j- v, /* •r y&oS? 7sswy ^^j ASS?£*7s4x/O£~.


### ^*A&X2>. 7/vsr

### SB99 3--Z472'sSK/y 9&

'*TA/ Z50S7&*/ FILED IN COURT OF CRIMINALAPPEALS AUG t© 2015- Abel Acosta, Clerk
###### Editorial Note on Part 25

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 25 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

#### § 25.410 System for Award Management (SAM).

*System for Award Management (SAM)* has the meaning given in paragraph C.1 of the award term in appendix A to this part.
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. 08-50695

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

KENYA DIONNE SNEED, also known as Kenya Dionne Coker,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:08-CR-23-ALL

Before KING, STEWART, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Kenya Dionne Sneed has moved for

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California,

386 U.S. 738 (1967). Sneed has filed a response, arguing, in part, that she

received ineffective assistance of counsel and requesting permission to proceed

pro se. The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time

of Sneed’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; such claims generally

“cannot be resolved on direct appeal when [they have] not been raised before the

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 14, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 08-50695

2

district court since no opportunity existed to develop the record on the merits of

the allegations.” United States v. Cantwell, 470 F.3d 1087, 1091 (5th Cir. 2006)

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Our independent review of the record, counsel’s brief, and Sneed’s

response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, the motion for

leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2. Sneed’s request

to proceed pro se on appeal is DENIED. See United States v. Wagner, 158 F.3d

901, 902-03 (5th Cir. 1998).
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A2281. STEVEN SMITH v. THE STATE.

In 2009, StevenSmith pled guilty to voluntarymanslaughter. In February 2015,

Smith filed a pro se motion to vacate a void judgment, arguing that his arrest warrant

was unlawful. The trial court denied the motion, and Smith filed this direct appeal.

We lack jurisdiction.

A motion seeking to challenge an allegedly invalid or void judgment of

conviction “is not one of the established procedures for challenging the validity of a

judgment in a criminal case.” Roberts v. State, 286 Ga. 532 (690 SE2d 150) (2010).

Because Smith is not authorized to collaterally attack his conviction in this manner,

this appeal issubject to dismissal. See id.;see also Harper v. State, 286 Ga. 216, 218

(1) (686 SE2d 786) (2009) (overruling Chester v. State, 284 Ga. 162, 162-163 (2)

(664 SE2d 220) (2008)); Matherlee v. State, 303 Ga. App. 765 (694 SE2d 665)

(2010). Accordingly, Smith’s appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

09/11/2015

September 11, 2015
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU NE 12, 2015

NO. 03

- 12

- 00415

- CV

Bryan Berger and Lori Berger, Appellant s

v.

Tony Flores, Jr., Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF COMAL COUNTY BEFORE CHIEF JUSTI CE ROSE, JUSTICES GO ODWIN AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the interlocutory summary judgment order made final by the severance

order signed by the trial court on October 7, 2010 and the judgment awarding sanctions signed

by the tr i a l court on May 16, 2012. Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the

C ourt holds that there was no reversible error in the trial court’s judg ment s . Therefore, the C ourt

affirms the trial court’s judgment s

. The appellant s shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both

in this Court and the court below.
H. R. 7199 

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-four 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at S74w16860 

Janesville Road, in Muskego, Wisconsin, as the ‘‘Colonel Hans Christian Heg 

Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. COLONEL HANS CHRISTIAN HEG POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located S74w16860 Janesville Road in Muskego, Wisconsin, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Colonel Hans Christian 

Heg Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Colonel Hans Christian Heg Post Office’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
<PAGE>




                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1


                                  CERTIFICATION


         Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), and Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted),
Nathan Zommer, Chief Executive Officer of IXYS Corporation (the "Company"), and
Arnold P. Agbayani, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify
that, to the best of their knowledge:

1.      The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for period ended March 31,
2004, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.1 (the "Annual
Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d)
of the Exchange Act, and

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

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of
the 14th day of June, 2004.


/s/ Nathan Zommer                       /s/ Arnold P. Agbayani
-----------------                       -----------------------
Nathan Zommer                           Arnold P. Agbayani
Chief Executive Officer                 Chief Financial Officer
# L_2020359DE.01002101.xml

| 29.10.2020 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | L 359/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.10.2020

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

L 359/21

---

Berichtigung der Delegierten Verordnung (EU) 2018/1229 der Kommission vom 25. Mai 2018 zur Ergänzung der Verordnung (EU) Nr. 909/2014 des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates durch technische Regulierungsstandards zur Abwicklungsdisziplin

(
  Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 230 vom 13. September 2018
  )

Seite 18, Artikel 31 Absatz 2:

Anstatt:

„(2)   Nach Erhalt der in Absatz 1 genannten Mitteilung stellt das ausfallende Clearingmitglied sicher, dass alle mit der gescheiterten Abwicklung verbundenen relevanten Abwicklungsanweisungen ausgesetzt werden.“

muss es heißen:

„(2)   Nach Erhalt der in Absatz 1 genannten Mitteilung stellt der ausfallende Handelspartner sicher, dass alle mit der gescheiterten Abwicklung verbundenen relevanten Abwicklungsanweisungen ausgesetzt werden.“

---
#### DEN, SNEDECKER *against*ALLEN.

Motion that defendant stand trial at the next circuit, he having once put it off, refused.

This cause had been noticed for trial at the last Middlesex circuit, held by the Chief Justice, and on its being called on in the paper, the defendant put off the cause [*] on the common affidavit, of the absence of a material witness.

*Mr. Leake,*on the part of the plaintiff, now moved the court, that the defendant *stand trial,*at the Middlesex circuit, to be held in December next; or, in default, thereof, that in the Term of February following, his plea of not guilty be overruled, and judgment of default be rendered in favor of the *261plaintiff. In support of this motion, he endeavored to show that great and unreasonable delay had been caused by the defendant, that his conduct was vexatious, and that in this instance he had imposed on the court, and then commenced an argument to show the origin and progress of the practice of putting off trials on the ground of the absence of a witness.

Pennington, J.

— Mr. Leake, your arguments are, no doubt, learned and instructing; but I shall be glad to be informed, if there is any authority or precedent for the rule now asked for ? Can the court legally, and according to the rules of practice, allow your motion ?

*Mr. Leake,*said, if the court was not willing to hear him, he would sit down.

Pennington, J. — The court is no doubt willing to hear you; but it may save time to show', that in case the vexation and imposition you complain of, is true in fact, that the court can give you relief in the way you ask it; the application appears to me novel and unprecedented. Can you produce an authority that would justify the court in sustaining the present application?

*Mr. Leake*said he wished to be heard through; and then went into a lengthy discourse on the subject of putting off trials in case of the absence of witnesses, and concluded with citing the following cases to [203] justify his motion: *3d Wil. 394; 2 Bac.*title “Pleas and Pleadings;” *Salk. 257; 3d Bur. 660; 2d Blac. Rep. 810.*

The Court, without hearing the other side, expressed [*] an opinion that the application was novel and wholly unprecedented; that the cases cited by Mr. Leake were foreign from the question before the court; that they could not foretell what legal cause might exist for putting off the cause at the next circuit; that there was nothing in the present case that called for a changedn rules, founded on long practice and experience; and the Chief Justice said, there was no *262foundation for the complaint. The cause had been once tried before him; he, therefore, knew that the absent witness was a material one; and it appeared by affidavit, and was not now denied, that he had been duly *subpoenaed,*and he did not appear.

*Leake,*for plaintiff.

*R. Stockton,*for defendant.

Rule reversed.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 1 (Monday, January 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 111]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-33096]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Notice of Federal Advisory Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition University, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 
1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine 
Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150, the 
Department of Defense announces that the following Federal advisory 
committee meeting will take place:
    1. Name of Committee: Defense Acquisition University Board of 
Visitors (BoV).
    2. Date: Wednesday, January 26, 2011.
    3. Time: 9 a.m.-2 p.m.
    4. Location: Admiral Kidd Conference Center, Naval Mine and Anti-
Submarine Warfare Command, Pt. Loma, San Diego, CA 92147.
    5. Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of this meeting is to report 
back to the BoV on continuing items of interest.
    6. Agenda:

9 a.m. Welcome and approval of minutes.
9:15 a.m. DAU Support to Space Acquisition Community.
10:15 a.m. Acquisition Research.
10:45 a.m. Future Direction of DAU.
12:45 p.m. DoD Ethics Training.
13:30 p.m. Open Forum.

    7. Public's Accessibility to the Meeting: Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b 
and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and the availability of space, 
this meeting is open to the public. However, because of space 
limitations, allocation of seating will be made on a first-come, first-
served basis. Persons desiring to attend the meeting should call Ms. 
Christen Goulding at 703-805-5134.
    8. Committee's Designated Federal Officer or Point of Contact: Ms. 
Kelley Berta, 703-805-5412.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christen Goulding, Protocol Director, 
DAU, Phone: 703-805-5134, Fax: 703-805-5940, E-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f89b908a918b8c9d96d69f978d949c91969fb89c998dd6959194"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d5b6bda7bca6a1b0bbfbb2baa0b9b1bcbbb295b1b4a0fbb8bcb9">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: December 28, 2010.
Morgan F. Park,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2010-33096 Filed 12-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>