alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Women Workers After VJ-Day in One Community: Bridgeport, Connecticut

              																	United States. Women's Bureau					,	Williams, Constance Willard					,	Erickson, Ethel					 and 	Spring, Isadore A. 						*Women Workers After VJ-Day in One Community: Bridgeport, Connecticut : Women's Bureau Bulletin, No. 216*,												Washington: 								Govt. Print. Off., 										[1947],									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/5487,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       1,455,243
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  446,667
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    482,564
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,428,597
<PP&E>                                         113,152
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,545,721
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          106,452
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        34,009
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,405,260
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,545,721
<SALES>                                        440,208
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               440,208
<CGS>                                          179,476
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  179,476
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               190,580
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 84,987
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             84,987
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    84,987
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.02


</TABLE>
[No. 21244-7-II.

Division Two.

January 9, 1998.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Cary L. Swofford, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Thurston County, No. 95-1-01667-1, Richard A. Strophy, J., entered October 10, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Houghton, C.J., concurred in by Bridgewater and Hunt, JJ.
#### § 780.137 Who in USAID may grant an exception to let an excluded person participate in a covered transaction?

The Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Management, or designee as delegated in Agency policy found in ADS 103—Delegations of Authority, may grant an exception permitting an excluded person to participate in a particular covered transaction. If the Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Management or designee, grants an exception, the exception must be in writing and state the reason(s) for deviating from the government-wide policy in Executive Order 12549.

[80 FR 12915, Mar. 12, 2015]
§ 174.5 General provisions applicable to indirect food additives. ( a ) Regulations prescribing conditions under which food additive substances may be safely used predicate usage under conditions of good manufacturing practice. For the purpose of this part and parts 175, 176, and 177 of this chapter, good manufacturing practice shall be defined to include the following restrictions: ( 1 ) The quantity of any food additive substance that may be added to food as a result of use in articles that contact food shall not exceed, where no limits are specified, that which results from use of the substance in an amount not more than reasonably required to accomplish the intended physical or technical effect in the food-contact article; shall not exceed any prescribed limitations; and shall not be intended to accomplish any physical or technical effect in the food itself, except as such may be permitted by regulations in parts 170 through 189 of this chapter.
( 2 ) Any substance used as a component of articles that contact food shall be of a purity suitable for its intended use.
( b ) The existence in the subchapter B of a regulation prescribing safe conditions for the use of a substance as an article or component of articles that contact food shall not be construed to relieve such use of the substance or article from compliance with any other provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. For example, if a regulated food-packaging material were found on appropriate test to impart odor or taste to a specific food product such as to render it unfit within the meaning of section 402(a)(3) of the Act, the regulation would not be construed to relieve such use from compliance with section 402(a)(3).
( c ) The existence in this subchapter B of a regulation prescribing safe conditions for the use of a substance as an article or component of articles that contact food shall not be construed as implying that such substance may be safely used as a direct additive in food.
( d ) Substances that under conditions of good manufacturing practice may be safely used as components of articles that contact food include the following, subject to any prescribed limitations: ( 1 ) Substances generally recognized as safe in or on food.
( 2 ) Substances generally recognized as safe for their intended use in food packaging.
( 3 ) Substances used in accordance with a prior sanction or approval.
( 4 ) Substances permitted for use by regulations in this part and parts 175, 176, 177, 178 and § 179.45 of this chapter.
( 5 ) Food contact substances used in accordance with an effective premarket notification for a food contact substance (FCN) submitted under section 409(h) of the act.
[42 FR 14534, Mar. 15, 1977, as amended at 67 FR 35731, May 21, 2002]
<PAGE>   1

                                   EXHIBIT 21.1

                      SUBSIDIARIES OF DATA DIMENSIONS, INC.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                           Jurisdiction
                                                                 of
                                                           Incorporation
                                                           -------------

<S>                                                        <C>
Data Dimensions Ireland Limited                            Ireland

Data Dimensions (UK) Limited                               England

Data Dimensions Information Services, Inc.                 California

Data Dimensions FSC, Inc.                                  Guam
</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.7

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration
Statement on Form S-3 of our report dated March 17, 1998 relating to the
consolidated financial statements of Allsport Photographic plc for the year
ended November 30, 1997. We also consent to the reference to us under the
heading "Experts" in such Registration Statement.

Maidment Penney Quick & Co.

Maidment Penney Quick & Co.

London, England

November 15, 1999
1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT DALLAS

KEVIN ALLEN FOSTER , § APPELLANT § § No. 05

- 14 -01186- CR

v. § § THE STATE OF TEXAS, § APPELLEE §

STATE’S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

TO FILE STATE’S BRIEF
COMES NOW, the State of Texas, by and through the Criminal District
Attorney of Collin County, Greg Willis, and tenders, pursuant to Texas Rules of
Appellate Procedure 10.5(b) and 38.6(d), its first motion for an extension of time
to file the State’s brief. In support of this motion, the State would show the
following:

I.

The Court below is the 41 6th Judicial District Court of Collin County,

Texas. The case is styled State of Texas v. Keven Allen Foster, cause number 366

-

80380-2014.

II.
Appell ee was convicted by a jury of continuous sexual abuse of a child and
sentenced by the trial court to fifty years in prison. ACCEPTED 05-14-01186-CR FIFTH COURT OF APPEALS

DALLAS, TEXAS 6/1/2015 1:09:47 PM

LISA MATZ CLERK2 III.

The State’s brief wa s due on May 24 , 2015

. The State has not previously
requested an extension of time

. The case is not yet set for submission.

IV.
The State is requesting this extension so that it might adequately address the

issues at hand . The extension is not requested for the purpose of an improper delay.

V.
The State alleges good cause exists for the extension. The undersigned has
filed one brief and two oral arguments before this Court in the past month.
Additionally, undersigned was out of town for the Memorial Day holiday . The
State’s brief is filed contemporaneous with this mot ion.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the State respectfully requests that the
Court grant the State’s motion to extend the time to file its brief for eight days
,
until June 1 , 2015

.

Respectfully submitted,

GREG WILLIS Criminal District Attorney Collin County, Texas

JOHN R. ROLATER, JR. Assistant Criminal District Attorney3 Chief of the Appellate Division

/s/ Andrea L. Westerfeld ANDREA L. WESTERFELD Assistant Criminal District Attorney 2100 Bloomdale Rd., Ste. 200 McKinney, Texas 75071 State Bar No. 24042143 (972) 548

- 4323 FAX ( 214 ) 491

- 4860 awesterfeld@co.collin.tx.us

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
A true copy of the State’s First Motion f or Extension o f Time t o File State’s

Brief has been electronically served on counsel for Appell ant , Debbie Lopez

- Carr
, and a courtesy copy emailed to ourgoodlawyer@gmail.com , on this, the 1s t day of

June , 2015

.

/s/ Andrea L. Westerfeld Andrea L. Westerfeld
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.25

                                                      [BEND RESEARCH, INC. LOGO]



March 6, 1997



Mr. Volker G. Oakey
President
Consep, Inc.
213 Southwest Columbia
Bend, OR   97702

Re:   Reduced R&D Programs obligation under the License Agreement (the
      "Agreement") dated November 1, 1993 between Consep, Inc. ("Consep") and
      Bend Research, Inc. ("Bend") for the calendar year 1997.

Dear Volker:

      Pursuant to Paragraph 4.2 of the Agreement, this letter is to confirm our
mutual agreement regarding Consep's R&D Program obligation, as set forth in
Paragraph 4.1 of the Agreement. Bend agrees with Consep that a reduction in that
obligation is needed to maximize the value of our investment in Consep. The R&D
Program obligation is, therefore, reduced to one hundred twenty five thousand
dollars ($125,000) for the calendar year 1997. Also, during 1997 there is no
required portion of the R&D Program obligation that must be spent on biorational
products. Except as set forth above, the rights of the parties under the
Agreement shall remain unchanged.

      This reduction in Consep's R&D Program obligation does not constitute any
intent to reduce that obligation in any subsequent calendar year or to reduce
any other Consep obligation during 1997 or any subsequent calendar year.

      If the above accurately reflects your understanding of our mutual
agreement, please sign and date the enclosed copy of this letter and return it
to me.

Best regards,

/s/  Walter C. Babcock

Walter C. Babcock

Accepted and agreed to:

CONSEP, INC.

By: /s/ Volker G. Oakey           Date: March 13, 1997
   --------------------                               
        Volker G. Oakey
#### § 1240.80 General requirements for water for drinking and culinary purposes.

Only potable water shall be provided for drinking and culinary purposes by any operator of a conveyance engaged in interstate traffic, except as provided in § 1250.84(b) of this chapter. Such water shall either have been obtained from watering points approved by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, or, if treated aboard a conveyance, shall have been subjected to treatment approved by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs.

[40 FR 5620, Feb. 6, 1975, as amended at 48 FR 11431, Mar. 18, 1983]
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7192 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 333 West Broadway in Anaheim, California, 

as the ‘‘Dr. William I. ‘Bill’ Kott Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 7192 EH

1 SECTION 1. DR. WILLIAM I. ‘‘BILL’’ KOTT POST OFFICE 

2 BUILDING. 

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

4 Postal Service located at 333 West Broadway in Anaheim, 

5 California, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Dr. Wil6 liam I. ‘Bill’ Kott Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Dr. William I. ‘Bill’ 

11 Kott Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 3, 2024. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7192 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostKott Post Office Building’’. heim, California, as the ‘‘Dr. William I. ‘Bill’ al Service located at 333 West Broadway in Ana-
[No. 16251-6-III.

Division Three.

January 27, 1998.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Israel Valencia Espinoza, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Yakima County, No. 96-1-00884-8, Michael W. Leavitt, J., entered November 15, 1996. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Schultheis, C.J., concurred in by Kurtz and Brown, JJ.
Editorial Note on Part 181
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 181 appear at 61 FR 14482, Apr. 2, 1996, and 66 FR 56035, Nov. 6, 2001.

§ 181.5 Prior sanctions. ( a ) A prior sanction shall exist only for a specific use(s) of a substance in food, i.e., the level(s), condition(s), product(s), etc., for which there was explicit approval by the Food and Drug Administration or the United States Department of Agriculture prior to September 6, 1958.
( b ) The existence of a prior sanction exempts the sanctioned use(s) from the food additive provisions of the Act but not from the other adulteration or the misbranding provisions of the Act.
( c ) All known prior sanctions shall be the subject of a regulation published in this part. Any such regulation is subject to amendment to impose whatever limitation(s) or condition(s) may be necessary for the safe use of the ingredient, or revocation to prohibit use of the ingredient, in order to prevent the adulteration of food in violation of section 402 of the Act.
( d ) In proposing, after a general evaluation of use of an ingredient, regulations affirming the GRAS status of substances added directly to human food in part 184 of this chapter or substances in food-contact surfaces in part 186 of this chapter, or establishing a food additive regulation for substances added directly to human food in parts 172 and 173 of this chapter or food additives in food-contact surfaces in parts 174, 175, 176, 177, 178 and § 179.45 of this chapter, the Commissioner shall, if he is aware of any prior sanction for use of the ingredient under conditions different from those proposed in the regulation, concurrently propose a separate regulation covering such use of the ingredient under this part. If the Commissioner is unaware of any such applicable prior sanction, the proposed regulation will so state and will require any person who intends to assert or rely on such sanction to submit proof of its existence. Any food additive or GRAS regulation promulgated after a general evaluation of use of an ingredient constitutes a determination that excluded uses would result in adulteration of the food in violation of section 402 of the Act, and the failure of any person to come forward with proof of such an applicable prior sanction in response to a proposal will constitute a waiver of the right to assert or rely on such sanction at any later time. The notice will also constitute a proposal to establish a regulation under this part, incorporating the same provisions, in the event that such a regulation is determined to be appropriate as a result of submission of proof of such an applicable prior sanction in response to the proposal.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7184 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7184

 To provide the Congressional Budget Office with necessary authorities 
to expedite the sharing of data from executive branch agencies, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 1, 2024

  Mr. Grothman (for himself, Mr. Mfume, Mr. Ferguson, and Ms. Porter) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                      Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide the Congressional Budget Office with necessary authorities 
to expedite the sharing of data from executive branch agencies, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Congressional Budget Office Data 
Access Act''.

SEC. 2. CONDITIONS OF DISCLOSURE FOR FEDERAL AGENCY INFORMATION WITH 
              THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE.

    Subsection (b) of section 552a of title 5, United States Code 
(commonly known as the ``Privacy Act of 1974''), is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraphs (11) and (12) as paragraphs 
        (12) and (13), respectively; and
            (2) by inserting after paragraph (10) the following:
            ``(11) to the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, 
        or any authorized representative of the Director, in the course 
        of performance of the duties of the Congressional Budget 
        Office;''.
                                 <all>
```
{In Archive} Re: Conference Call 

Shaheerah Kelly to: Wilson Laughter 04/04/2006 01:47 PM

Cc: Charlene Nelson, "Rachel G. Misra"

From: Shaheerah Kelly/R9/USEPA/US

To: Wilson Laughter <wilsonlaughter@navajo.org>, 

Cc: Charlene Nelson <charlenenelson@navajo.org>, "Rachel G. Misra" 

<rachelgmisra@navajo.org>

Archive: This message is being viewed in an archive.

Thanks, Wilson. I will check with the appropriate people here regarding the date and get back to you. 

Shaheerah Kelly

U S EPA Region 9

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

Phone: 415-947-4156

Fax: 415-947-3579

Wilson Laughter <wilsonlaughter@navajo.org>

Wilson Laughter 

<wilsonlaughter@navajo.org>

04/04/2006 01:36 PM

To Shaheerah Kelly/R9/USEPA/US@EPA

cc "Rachel G. Misra" <rachelgmisra@navajo.org>, Charlene 

Nelson <charlenenelson@navajo.org>

Subject Conference Call

Hi Shaheerah:

The afternoon of April 17 is good for us. We anticipate on having Charlene Nelson, Rachel Misra, and 

myself on this conference call. If this works out for you too, we can make arrangements for that 

afternoon.

Wilson

NNAQCP

From: Kelly.Shaheerah@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Kelly.Shaheerah@epamail.epa.gov]

Sent: Mon 3/27/2006 10:55 AM

To: Charlene Nelson

Cc: Wilson Laughter; stephenetsitty@navajo.org

Subject: Conference Call

Hi, Charlene. This is a follow-up to our phone conversation. We will be

having a telephone conference call with ExxonMobil, who is the current

owner of the McElmo Creek Unit on the Navajo Reservation. The purpose of
the call is to discuss some issues regarding the drafting of the

company's Title V permit. Some possible dates that we will have the call

are April 4, 5, 6, or 7th. Please let me know of your availability on

these days and who from Navajo EPA will be joining in on the call. Feel

free to contact me if you have any questions. Thanks.

Shaheerah Kelly

U S EPA Region 9

75 Hawthorne Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

Phone: 415-947-4156

Fax: 415-947-3579