alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Health Resources and Services Administration

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Thomas Morris, MPA, Executive Secretary, National Advisory Committee on Rural Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Parklawn Building, Room 10B-45, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, Telephone (301) 443-0835, Fax (301) 443-2803.

                        Persons interested in attending any portion of the meeting should contact Tish Scolnick at the Office of Rural Health Policy (ORHP) via Telephone at (301) 443-0835, or by e-mail at                         *nscolnick@hrsa.gov.*                         The Committee meeting agenda will be posted on ORHP's Web site                         *http://www.ruralhealth.hrsa.gov.*

      ( print page 161)    
 Dated: December 27, 2010,,

Robert Hendricks,

Director, Division of Policy and Information Coordination.

[FR Doc. 2010-33062 Filed 12-30-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ANTHONY TAYLOR,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-1017

[July 18, 2019]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Laura Johnson, Judge; 

L.T. Case No. 1992CF014834.

Anthony Taylor, Crawfordville, pro se.

No appearance filed for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

MAY, DAMOORGIAN, and GERBER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
ATTACHMENT A 


RESOLUTION NO. 12-11 


A Resolution of the Governing Board of the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (Governing Board) certifying the previously prepared 

(October 2010) Final Environmental Assessment for Proposed Rule 1420.1 ­

Emissions Standard for Lead From Large Lead-Acid Battery Recycling Facilities, 

as the CEQA document for the 2012 Lead State Implementation Plan for Los 

Angeles County (2012 Lead SIP for LA County), and adopting the 2012 Lead SIP 

for LA County. 

WHEREAS, the Los Angeles County portion of the South Coast Air Basin is 

currently classified as non attainment for the 2008 lead National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) in accordance with the federal Clean Air Act (CAA); and 

WHEREAS, the federal CAA requires State Implementation Plans for areas not in 

attainment with the 2008 lead NAAQS be submitted within 18 months of the effective 

date of the nonattainment designation, meeting the requirements of part D, Title 1 of the 

CAA, whereby, the 2012 Lead SIP for LA County must be submitted to EPA by July 1, 

2012; and 

WHEREAS, certain areas classified as nonattainment are required to attain the 

federal lead NAAQS by December 31,2015; and 

WHEREAS, the South Coast Air Quality Management District is committed to 

comply with the requirements ofthe CAA; and 

WHEREAS, the 2012 Lead SIP for LA County demonstrates that the Los 

Angeles County portion of the South Coast Air Basin will attain the federal NAAQS for 

lead by 2015; and 

WHEREAS, the 2012 Lead SIP for LA County satisfies the planning 

requirements set forth in the federal and California Clean Air Acts; and 

WHEREAS, the South Coast Air Quality Management District Board finds and 

determines that the 2012 Lead SIP for LA County, is considered a "project" pursuant to 

the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 

WHEREAS, the AQMD has had its regulatory program certified pursuant to 

Public Resources Code Section 21080.5 and has conducted CEQA review and analysis 

pursuant to such program (Rule 110) for Rule 1420.1; and 

1
Editorial Note on Part 184
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 184 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; and 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016.

§ 184.1025 Caprylic acid. ( a ) Caprylic acid [CH3(CH2)6COOH, CAS Reg. No. 124-07-2] is the chemical name for octanoic acid. It is considered to be a short or medium chain fatty acid. It occurs normally in various foods and is commercially prepared by oxidation of *n*-octanol or by fermentation and fractional distillation of the volatile fatty acids present in coconut oil.
( b ) The ingredient meets the specifications of the “Food Chemicals Codex,” 3d Ed. (1981), p. 207, which is incorporated by reference. Copies may be obtained from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20418, 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 .*
( c ) The ingredient is used as a flavoring agent and adjuvant as defined in § 170.3(o)(12) of this chapter.
( d ) The ingredient is used in foods in accordance with § 184.1(b)(1), at levels not to exceed good manufacturing practice. Current good manufacturing practices result in maximum levels, as served, of: 0.013 percent for baked goods as defined in § 170.3(n)(1) of this chapter; 0.04 percent for cheeses as defined in § 170.3(n)(5) of this chapter; 0.005 percent for fats and oils as defined in § 170.3(n)(12) of this chapter, for frozen dairy desserts as defined in § 170.3(n)(20) of this chapter, for gelatins and puddings as defined in § 170.3(n)(22) of this chapter, for meat products as defined in § 170.3(n)(29) of this chapter, and for soft candy as defined in § 170.3(n)(38) of this chapter; 0.016 percent for snack foods as defined in § 170.3(n)(37) of this chapter; and 0.001 percent or less for all other food categories.
( e ) Prior sanctions for this ingredient different from the uses established in this section do not exist or have been waived.
[43 FR 19843, May 9, 1978, as amended at 49 FR 5611, Feb. 14, 1984]
Editorial Note on Part 184
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 184 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; and 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016.

§ 184.1560 Ox bile extract. ( a ) Ox bile extract (CAS Reg. No. 8008-63-7), also known as purified oxgall or sodium choleate, is a yellowish green, soft solid, with a partly sweet, partly bitter, disagreeable taste. It is the purified portion of the bile of an ox obtained by evaporating the alcohol extract of concentrated bile.
( b ) Food-grade ox bile extract shall meet the specifications of the U.S. Pharmacopeia (USP), XIV, 1950, p. 410.[1]
( c ) The ingredient is used as a surfactant as defined in § 170.3 (o)(29) of this chapter.
( d ) The ingredient is used in food in accordance with § 184.1(b)(1) at levels not to exceed good manufacturing practice. Current good manufacturing practice results in a maximum level, as served, of 0.002 percent for cheese as defined in § 170.3(n)(5) of this chapter.
( e ) Prior sanctions for this ingredient different from the uses established in this section do not exist or have been waived.
[43 FR 36064, Aug. 15, 1978. Redesignated and amended at 50 FR 49537, Dec. 3, 1985] Footnotes -
184.1560
[1] Copies may be obtained from: U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention, Inc., 12601 Twinbrook Parkway, Rockville, MD 20852.
[No. 20898-9-II.

Division Two.

January 9, 1998.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Tylan G. Matthews, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Grays Harbor County, No. 95-1-00541-4, David E. Foscue, J., entered June 10, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Houghton, C.J., concurred in by Bridgewater and Hunt, JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECMEMBER 31, 1997 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          12,764
<SECURITIES>                                    12,872
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,224
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      6,695
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                36,191
<PP&E>                                          23,938
<DEPRECIATION>                                  13,078
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  56,199
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,596
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                      36,345
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    56,199
<SALES>                                          8,089
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,342
<CGS>                                            3,710
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,939
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                20,621
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  20
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (16,625)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (16,625)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (16,625)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.15)
        

</TABLE>
#### Ronald LAMARQUE and Lamarque Ford, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MASSACHUSETTS INDEMNITY & LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, and Equifax Services, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 85-3547.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

July 14, 1986.

Francis G. Weller, New Orleans, for Massachusetts Indem. & Life Ins. Co.

Ellis B. Murov, Donald R. Mintz, New Orleans, La., for plaintiffs-appellees.

Before GEE, and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges, and HARVEY*, District Judge.

*

 District Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.

GEE, Circuit Judge:

The facts of this case are set out in the companion appeal, *Lamarque v. Massachusetts Indemnity Life Insurance Company,*794 F.2d 194. In that appeal we affirmed the district court’s grant of a partial summary judgment in favor of the defendant. This appeal stems from the district court’s denial of the defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to the plaintiffs’ claim under the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (LUTP), La.Rev.Stat. 51:-1401 et seq. (West Annot. Supplement 1986). The district court granted leave pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292 for the defendant to apply to us for an interlocutory appeal of the decision. We granted the application.

> Section 1406 of the LUTP provides:

> The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to:

> *198(1) Actions or transactions subject to the jurisdiction of the Louisiana Public Service Commission or other public utility regulatory body, the state bank commissioner, and the insurance com-missioner____

MILICO argues that the LUTP is not applicable because the Louisiana Insurance Code empowers the insurance commissioner to take action against any insurer which engages in unfair trade practices by violating “any prohibitory law of this state,” La.Rev.Stat. 22:1214(12), and that Section 1405(A) of the LUTP1 is just such a prohibitory law.

We disagree. If the provisions of LUTP aren’t applicable to claims within the jurisdiction of the insurance commissioner, the LUTP can hardly be used to create jurisdiction on the insurance commissioner’s part.

The district court did not err in denying the motion for summary judgment on this ground. However, because the district court has not considered the other grounds for the defendant’s motion, we decline to do so and accordingly REMAND this matter to the district court.

1

. La.Rev.Stat. 51:1405(A) provides: Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful.
Exhibit 32

                            Certification Pursuant to
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


            Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of Medialink
Worldwide Incorporated (the "Company") hereby certify to such officers'
knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended March 31, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


Dated: May 17, 2004


                                         /s/ Laurence Moskowitz
                                         -------------------------
                                         Name:  Laurence Moskowitz
                                         Title: Chief Executive Officer


                                         /s/ J. Graeme McWhirter
                                         -------------------------
                                         Name:  J. Graeme McWhirter
                                         Title: Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

- 1 - UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 98-20584 Summary Calendar

_____________________
MICHAEL RICHIE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

GARY JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION; CAROL VANCE; ELLEN J. HALBERT, Vice Chairwoman,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 97-CV-1027

August 31, 1999

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Michael Richie, Texas inmate # 349726, appeals pro se the

dismissal, for failure to state a claimupon which relief can be

granted, of his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 civil rights action. He contends

that his due process rights were violated when the Texas Department

of Criminal Justice refused to restore good-time credit which he

lost on return to prison after revocation of his parole. Unlike in- 2 -

d istrict court, Richie does not assert that his equal protection

rights and the Ex Post Facto Clause were violated. Those claims,

therefore, are deemed abandoned. S ee Yohey v. Collins

, 985 F.2d

222, 223-24 (5th Cir. 1993).

Because Richie lacks a constitutionally protected liberty

interest in the restoration of the good-time credit, he fails to

state a claim upon wh ich relief may be granted. S ee Hallmark v.

Johnson

, 118 F.3d 1073, 1079-80 (5th Cir.) cert. denied

, 118 S. Ct.

576 (1997). Accordingly, the dismissal of his action is

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT
      32.1





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 Quarterly Report on Form   10-Q of
      Southwall Technologies Inc. (the “Company”), for the quarter ended September 30,
      2007 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
      (the “Report”), I, Dr. Eugene Goodson, the Principal Executive Officer of the
      Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section   1350, as adopted
      pursuant to Section   906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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.








February
                5, 2008
            By:
            /s/
                R. Eugene   GoodsonDr.   .R . Eugene   GoodsonPrincipal
                Executive OfficerExecutive
                Chairman





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section   906, or other
      document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature
      that
      appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
      required by Section   906, has been provided to the Company and will be
      retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
      or its staff upon request.





In
      accordance with Item 601 of Regulation S-K, this certification is being
“furnished” as Exhibit   32.1 to the Company's quarterly report and shall
      not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section   18 of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject to the
      liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference
      in
      any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except as
      expressly set forth by specific reference in such a filing.
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 7, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50778

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

PRIMITIVO AGUILAR-SILVA,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas 

USDC No. 3:06-CR-32

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

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Primitivo

Aguilar-Silva raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held

that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a

separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary

affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.
(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 results of operations
of the Company.
 /s/ WILLIAM C. GRIFFITHS

William C. GriffithsChairman of the Board of Directors, 
President and Chief Executive OfficerChampion Enterprises, Inc.November 5, 2008/s/ PHYLLIS A. KNIGHT

Phyllis A. KnightExecutive Vice President, Treasurer and 
Chief Financial OfficerChampion Enterprises, Inc.November 5, 2008
Editorial Note on Part 184
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 184 appear at 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001; 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001; 68 FR 15355, Mar. 31, 2003; 69 FR 13717, Mar. 24, 2004; 70 FR 40880, July 15, 2005; 70 FR 67651, Nov. 8, 2005; and 81 FR 49897, July 29, 2016.

§ 184.1535 Niacinamide. ( a ) Niacinamide (C6H6N2O, CAS Reg. No. 98-92-0) is the chemical 3-pyridinecarboxylic acid amide (nicotinamide). It is a white crystalline powder that is soluble in water, alcohol, ether, and glycerol. It melts between 128° and 131 °C.
( b ) The ingredient meets the specifications of the Food Chemicals Codex, 3d Ed. (1981), p. 205, which is incorporated by reference. Copies are available from the National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20418, or available for inspection 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 .*
( c ) In accordance with § 184.1(b)(1), the ingredient is used in food with no limitation other than current good manufacturing practice. The affirmation of this ingredient as generally recognized as safe (GRAS) as a direct human food ingredient is based upon the following current good manufacturing practice conditions of use: ( 1 ) The ingredient is used as a nutrient supplement as defined in § 170.3(o)(20) of this chapter.
( 2 ) The ingredient is used in foods at levels not to exceed current good manufacturing practice. The ingredient may also be used in infant formula in accordance with section 412(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) or with regulations promulgated under section 412(a)(2) of the Act.
( d ) Prior sanctions for this ingredient different from the uses established in this section do not exist or have been waived.
[48 FR 52033, Nov. 16, 1983; 48 FR 54336, Dec. 2, 1983]
Motion Granted and Order Filed November 10, 2015 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-15-00581-CR

NO. 14-15-00582-CR

NO. 14-15-00583-CR

____________

LUIS EDUARDO LARA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 405th District Court

Galveston County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 14CR2148, 14CR2149, 14CR2150

ORDER

Appellant has filed a motion in which he requests that we order the court 

reporter to supplement the reporter’s record with the exhibits admitted at trial. The 

motion is GRANTED. Accordingly, we order Carol Castillo, the deputy official 

court reporter, to file a supplemental reporter’s record containing all exhibits 

admitted at trial on or before December 7, 2015.
Appellant’s brief is due 30 days after the supplemental reporter’s record is 

filed. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 38.6(a)(2).

PER CURIAM