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

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7734 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to require a notation in the personnel 

record file of certain employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs 

who resign from Government employment under certain circumstances. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 20, 2024 

Mr. SCOTT FRANKLIN of Florida introduced the following bill; which was 

referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to require a notation 

in the personnel record file of certain employees of the 

Department of Veterans Affairs who resign from Government employment under certain circumstances. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NOTATION IN DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AF4 FAIRS EMPLOYEE PERSONNEL RECORD FILE 

5 OF PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION REQUIRED. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter I of chapter 7 of title 

7 38, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 

8 the following new section: 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 7734 IH

1 ‘‘§ 729. Notation in Department of Veterans Affairs 

2 employee personnel record file of per3 sonnel investigation 

4 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—With respect to any employee oc5 cupying a position in the competitive service or the ex6 cepted service within the Department who is the subject 

7 of a personnel investigation and who resigns from Govern8 ment employment prior to the resolution of such investiga9 tion, the Secretary shall make a permanent notation of 

10 such investigation in the official personnel record file of 

11 such employee. 

12 ‘‘(b) ADDITIONAL NOTATION.—With respect to any 

13 employee described in subsection (a), the Secretary shall 

14 make an additional notation in the official personnel 

15 record file of such employee whether any of the allegations 

16 made with respect to such employee pursuant to such in17 vestigation would have been substantiated. 

18 ‘‘(c) PERSONNEL INVESTIGATION DEFINED.—In this 

19 section, the term ‘personnel investigation’ includes— 

20 ‘‘(1) an investigation by an Inspector General; 

21 ‘‘(2) an internal investigation carried out by the 

22 Secretary; 

23 ‘‘(3) an investigation by the head of any other 

24 Federal office responsible for investigating allega25 tions of employee misconduct, including the General 

26 Counsel of the Department; and 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 7734 IH

1 ‘‘(4) an adverse personnel action as a result of 

2 performance, misconduct, or for such cause as will 

3 promote the efficiency of the service under chapter 

4 43 or chapter 75 of title 5.’’. 

5 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

6 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by inserting 

7 after the item relating to section 728 the following new 

8 item: 

‘‘729. Notation in Department of Veterans Affairs employee personnel 

record file of personnel investigation.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
RE: Draft list of potential minor EGUs Higgins, Cortney to: RobertJ Wayland 03/09/2011 08:48 AM Cc: Peter Tsirigotis, Bill Maxwell

Hi Bob,

Two requests: - In response to the draft area source language, can you specify what kind of information/circumstances would warrant the use of 112(d)(5) standards for area sources? We understand it's discretionary, but there's little information given as to when/why the agency would use that
discretion. - With the answer to the above question, can you expand the request for comment section to include that information? That should help to improve the comments that you receive on this issue.

Thanks, Cortney

-----Original Message----- From: Maxwell.Bill@epamail.epa.gov [mailto:Maxwell.Bill@epamail.epa.gov] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 12:49 PM To: Higgins, Cortney Cc: Wayland.Robertj@epamail.epa.gov; Blake.Wendy@epamail.epa.gov; Tsirigotis.Peter@epamail.epa.gov; Versace.Paul@epamail.epa.gov; Culligan.Kevin@epamail.epa.gov Subject: Draft list of potential minor EGUs

Cortney --

Attached are the spreadsheet presenting the current draft information on potential minor-source EGUs and the revised preamble language.

Thank you.

(See attached file: Draft area source language_030811.docx)(See attached file: Minor source estimate_030711.xlsx)

Deliberative Document -- FOIA Exempt

Bill Maxwell Energy Strategies Group Sector Policies and Programs Division
U.S. EPA Mail Code D243-01
109 T.W. Alexander Drive Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Phone: 919-541-5430
FAX: 919-541-5450
§ 814.82 Postapproval requirements. ( a ) FDA may impose postapproval requirements in a PMA approval order or by regulation at the time of approval of the PMA or by regulation subsequent to approval. Postapproval requirements may include as a condition to approval of the device: ( 1 ) Restriction of the sale, distribution, or use of the device as provided by section 515(d)(1)(B)(ii) or 520(e) of the act.
( 2 ) Continuing evaluation and periodic reporting on the safety, effectiveness, and reliability of the device for its intended use. FDA will state in the PMA approval order the reason or purpose for such requirement and the number of patients to be evaluated and the reports required to be submitted.
( 3 ) Prominent display in the labeling of a device and in the advertising of any restricted device of warnings, hazards, or precautions important for the device's safe and effective use, including patient information, e.g., information provided to the patient on alternative modes of therapy and on risks and benefits associated with the use of the device.
( 4 ) Inclusion of identification codes on the device or its labeling, or in the case of an implant, on cards given to patients if necessary to protect the public health.
( 5 ) Maintenance of records that will enable the applicant to submit to FDA information needed to trace patients if such information is necessary to protect the public health. Under section 519(a)(4) of the act, FDA will require that the identity of any patient be disclosed in records maintained under this paragraph only to the extent required for the medical welfare of the individual, to determine the safety or effectiveness of the device, or to verify a record, report, or information submitted to the agency.
( 6 ) Maintenance of records for specified periods of time and organization and indexing of records into identifiable files to enable FDA to determine whether there is reasonable assurance of the continued safety and effectiveness of the device.
( 7 ) Submission to FDA at intervals specified in the approval order of periodic reports containing the information required by § 814.84(b).
( 8 ) Batch testing of the device.
( 9 ) Such other requirements as FDA determines are necessary to provide reasonable assurance, or continued reasonable assurance, of the safety and effectiveness of the device.
( b ) An applicant shall grant to FDA access to any records and reports required under the provisions of this part, and shall permit authorized FDA employees to copy and verify such records and reports and to inspect at a reasonable time and in a reasonable manner all manufacturing facilities to verify that the device is being manufactured, stored, labeled, and shipped under approved conditions.
( c ) Failure to comply with any postapproval requirement constitutes a ground for withdrawal of approval of a PMA.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 0910-0231) [51 FR 26364, July 22, 1986, as amended at 51 FR 43344, Dec. 2, 1986]
EXHIBIT 99.1
                                  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.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-  Oxley Act of 2002,  and in  connection  with the annual report on
Form  10-KSB of  Volunteer  Bancorp,  Inc.  (the  "Company")  for the year ended
December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"),  the undersigned,  Reed D. Matney,  the President of
the  Company,  hereby  certifies  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 results of operations of the Company.

     This Certification is signed on March 28, 2003.


                                     /s/ Reed D. Matney
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Reed D. Matney
                                     President
Editorial Note on Part 866
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 866 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 866.5490 Hemopexin immunological test system. ( a ) *Indentification.* A hemopexin immunological test system is a device that consists of the reagents used to measure by immunochemical techniques the hemopexin (a serum protein that binds heme, a component of hemoglobin) in serum. Measurement of hemopexin aids in the diagnosis of various hematologic disorders, such as hemolytic anemia (anemia due to shortened in vivo survival of mature red blood cells and inability of the bone marrow to compensate for their decreased life span) and sickle cell anemia.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The device is exempt from the premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this chapter subject to § 866.9.
[47 FR 50823, Nov. 9, 1982, as amended at 63 FR 59227, Nov. 3, 1998]
# C_2015155EN.01003803.xml

| 11.5.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.5.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/38

---

Order of the General Court of 16 March 2015 — Hydro Aluminium Rolled Products and Others v Commission

(Case T-263/14) (1)

1

(2015/C 155/47)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           6,767
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    309,137
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        335,342
<ALLOWANCE>                                      2,833
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 675,316
<DEPOSITS>                                     443,878
<SHORT-TERM>                                   160,300
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              6,231
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      64,907
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 675,316
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 25,955
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               23,653
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   583
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                50,191
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              16,481
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              25,384
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           24,807
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      500
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  69
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 17,112
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,920
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       5,587
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,587
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.30
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.77
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,212
<LOANS-PAST>                                       291
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,197
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,613
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      297
<RECOVERIES>                                        17
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                2,833
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,833
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 11.1

                                  UROCOR, INC.
                STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION RE PER SHARE EARNINGS


                                                   YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                            -----------------------------------
                                               1996        1995         1994
                                            ----------  ----------  -----------

Net income (loss)                           $2,363,384  $  532,686  $(2,297,400)
                                            ----------  ----------  -----------
Divided by:

  Weighted average shares outstanding (1)    9,734,331   6,725,673    5,376,042
  Plus:
  Supplemental shares (2)                       97,215     569,875      727,993
                                            ----------  ----------  -----------
Total weighted average shares outstanding    9,831,546   7,295,548    6,104,035
                                            ----------  ----------  -----------
Earnings per share                          $     0.24  $     0.07  $     (0.38)
                                            ----------  ----------  -----------
                                            ----------  ----------  -----------

(1)  Convertible Preferred Stock, Class A Stock and Class B Stock are 
reflected on an "as if converted" basis for periods prior to the Company's 
initial public offering.  Common Stock issuable upon exercise of outstanding 
options and warrants is reflected using the treasury stock method.

(2) Reflects common and common stock equivalent shares issued in the 12 months 
prior to the Company's initial public offering at an exercise price below the 
public offering price of $11.00 per share.  After the first three months of 
1996, such common stock equivalent shares are included in the calculation of 
the "weighted average shares outstanding" above.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### OCT 6 1998 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

RICHARD WALTER JOHNSON,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v. GALE A. NORTON, PETER WARREN BOOTH, GILBERT MARTINEZ, JOHN WESLEY ANDERSON, and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF COLORADO,

Respondents-Appellees. No. 98-1101 (D.C. No. 98-D-27) (D. Colo.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before ANDERSON , BARRETT , and TACHA , Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materiallyassist the determination of-2-

this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The c ase is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Petitioner Richard Walter Johnson applies for a certificate of appealability so that he might appeal the district court’s dismis sal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He further requests permission to proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs or fees. For the reasons stated below, we deny the application for acertificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We further deny permission to proceed on appeal without prepayment of costs or fees. Mr. Johnson is incarcerated in the El Paso County J ail in Colorado Springs, Colorado. It appears from his § 2254 petition thathis conviction was affirmed by the Colorado Court of Appeals but that Mr. Johnson did not further appeal that judgment to the Colorado Supreme Court. He did fil e for state post-conviction relief, but again failed to appeal the denial of th at petition to the highest state court having jurisdiction over it. For these reaso ns, the district court denied Mr. Johnson’s petition for failure to exhaust state remedies. See Rose v. Lundy , 455 U.S. 509, 515 (1982); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). We review the legal basis for the district court’s dismissal of Mr. Johnson’s § 2254 petition de novo. See Jackson v. Shanks , 143 F.3d 1313, 1317 (10th Cir. 1998). After review of the materials submitted by Mr. Johnson and the record in-3-

this case, we find no fault with the order of the d istrict court. Mr. Johnson’s application for a certificate of appealability is D ENIED because he has failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). His requests to proceed on appeal wi thout prepayment of costs or fees and for rehearing and release pending appeal a re similarly DENIED. This appeal is DISMISSED. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Entered for the Court

James E. Barrett Senior Circuit Judge
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 19-12210

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:17-cr-20716-UU-2

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

 versus

PAUL PIERRE DELATOUR, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(October 8, 2020)

Before JORDAN, NEWSOM and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

USCA11 Case: 19-12210 Date Filed: 10/08/2020 Page: 1 of 2
2

Robert W. Stickney, appointed counsel for Paul Pierre Delatour in this direct 

criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant 

and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our 

independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the 

relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the entire 

record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is 

GRANTED, and Delatour’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 19-12210 Date Filed: 10/08/2020 Page: 2 of 2
# C_2014223EN.01001001.xml

| 14.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/10

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal du travail de Liège (Belgium) lodged on 14 May 2014 — Abdoulaye Amadou Tall v Centre public d’action sociale de Huy (CPAS de Huy)

(Case C-239/14)

2014/C 223/14

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal du travail de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Abdoulaye Amadou Tall

Applicant:

Defendant: Centre public d’action sociale de Huy (CPAS de Huy)

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

According to Article 39/1 of the Law of 15 December 1980 on entry to Belgian territory, residence, establishment and expulsion of foreign nationals read in conjunction with Articles 39/2(l), 3rd subparagraph, Article 39/76, Article 39/82(4), 2nd subparagraph (d) and 57/6/2 of the same law, only appeals seeking annulment and suspension due to extreme urgency may be brought against a decision refusing to consider a multiple asylum claim. Given that in such an appeal the court does not have full jurisdiction to determine issues of fact and law, the appeal does not have suspensory effect and that the applicant does not have the right of residence nor to material assistance while it is under consideration, are such appeals compatible with the requirements of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 39 of Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States (1) for granting and withdrawing refugee status which lay down the right to an effective remedy?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2005 L 326, p. 13.

1

---
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7702 

To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to submit a report 

to Congress on vessel fires and responses, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 15, 2024 

Mr. MENENDEZ introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to 

submit a report to Congress on vessel fires and responses, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. GAO REPORT ON VESSEL FIRES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

5 date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General 

6 of the United States shall submit to the Committee on 

7 Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Rep8 resentatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

9 and Transportation of the Senate a report on the state 

10 of marine firefighting authorities, jurisdiction, plan reVerDate Sep 11 2014 18:54 Mar 29, 2024 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H7702.IH H7702

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7702 IH

1 view, and other considerations with respect to vessel fires 

2 at waterfront facilities and within the navigable waters of 

3 the United States up to 3 nautical miles from the shore4 line. 

5 (b) CONTENTS.—In carrying out subsection (a), the 

6 Comptroller General shall— 

7 (1) examine factors that affect Federal and 

8 non-Federal collaboration aimed at reducing vessel 

9 and waterfront facility fire risk to local communities; 

10 (2) focus on the prevalence and frequency of 

11 vessel fires described in subsection (a); and 

12 (3) make recommendations for preparedness, 

13 responses to, training for, and other items for con14 sideration. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
§ 522.167 Betamethasone sodium phosphate and betamethasone acetate. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each milliliter (mL) of suspension contains 6 milligrams (mg) betamethasone (3.15 mg betamethasone sodium phosphate and 2.85 mg betamethasone acetate).
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 010797 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use in horses* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Administer 1.5 mL (9 mg total betamethasone) per joint by intra-articular injection. May be administered concurrently in up to two joints per horse.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* For the control of pain and inflammation associated with osteoarthritis in horses.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Do not use in horses intended for human consumption. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[80 FR 18776, Apr. 8, 2015]
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819

DCN: SE01118

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT 

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION 

(CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.