alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 73
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 73 appear at 66 FR 66742, Dec. 27, 2001.

§ 73.3126 Titanium dioxide. ( a ) *Identity and specifications.* The color additive titanium dioxide (CAS Reg. No. 13463-67-7), Color Index No. 77891, shall conform in identity and specifications to the requirements of § 73.575(a)(1) and (b).
( b ) *Uses and restrictions.* ( 1 ) The substance listed in paragraph (a) of this section may be used as a color additive in contact lenses and intraocular lens orientation marks in amounts not to exceed the minimum reasonably required to accomplish the intended coloring effect.
( 2 ) Authorization and compliance with this use shall not be construed as waiving any of the requirements of sections 510(k), 515, and 520(g) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to the contact lenses in which the additive is used.
( c ) *Labeling.* The label of the color additive shall conform to the requirements of § 70.25 of this chapter.
( d ) *Exemption from certification.* Certification of this color additive is not necessary for the protection of the public health, and therefore the color additive is exempt from the certification requirements of section 721(c) of the act.
[51 FR 24816, July 9, 1986, as amended at 81 FR 75692, Nov. 1, 2016]
# C_2017078EN.01004202.xml

| 13.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/42

---

Order of the General Court of 24 January 2017 — AATC Trading v EUIPO — El Corte Inglés (ALAΪA PARIS)

(Case T-794/14) (1)

1

(2017/C 078/58)

Language of the case: French

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

---

(1)  OJ C 65, 23.2.2015.

1

---
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ ADVANCE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC., Appellant,

v.

JOHN MCHUGH, SECRETARY OF THE ARMY, Appellee.

____________________

2011-1536

______________________ Appeal from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in Case No. 55232, Administrative Judge Owen C. Wilson.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

G. S COTT W ALTERS , Smith Currie & Hancock, LLP, of Atlanta, Georgia, argued for appellant. With him on the brief was H UBERT J. B ELL , J R

.

B RYANT G. S NEE , Deputy Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Divison, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for appellee. With him on the brief were T ONY W EST , Assistant Attorney General, J EANNE E. D AVIDSON , Director, and D AWN E. G OODMAN , Trial Attorney.

______________________T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (B RYSON , P ROST , and R EYNA , Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

July 12, 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date Jan Horbaly Clerk
SERVED: JANUARY 6, 2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

WINGS AIR, LLC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA- 2013-0849 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2012EA110052) has been aSsigned 

to Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and other communications 

regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other 

persons on the attached Service List. 

Attachment - Service List 
SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence A venue, S. W .. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

Wings Air, LLC, Respondent 

Javier Diaz, Agent for Service 

18 Hanger Road, Suite 200, Hanger T 

White Plains, NY 10604 

TEL:: 914-287-6450 

FAJ(: 914-274-9855 

Jared M. Allen, Respondent's Counsel 

The Aviation Law Finn i 

One Research Court, Suite 450 

Rockville, MD 20850 

TEL: 301-294-8550 

FAJ(: 301-294-2525 

ONE COPY 

Zachary M. Berman, Complainant's Counsel 

Office of the Regional Counsel, Eastern Region 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3258 

F AJ(: 718-995-5699 

Hon. J.E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2132 

FAJ(: 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-2013-0849 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington,. 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

-2-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S DECEMBER 31, 1997 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           8,337
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   68,564
<ALLOWANCES>                                     7,170
<INVENTORY>                                      5,359
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                84,133
<PP&E>                                         213,115
<DEPRECIATION>                                  76,388
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 361,876
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          104,973
<BONDS>                                        289,344
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                    (32,445)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   361,876
<SALES>                                         70,871
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               277,778
<CGS>                                           86,175
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   86,175
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               194,194
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              38,499
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (43,887)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (43,887)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (43,887)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.10)
        

</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-30569

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Jimmy R. Davis, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Application for a Certificate of Appealability

from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 3:18-CV-754

Before Smith, Higginson, and Willett, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Jimmy Davis, federal inmate #08450-095, moves for a certificate of 

appealability (“COA”) to appeal the dismissal, as time-barred, of his 

28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his convictions and sentences for distributing child pornography and transferring obscene materials to a minor.

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 13, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-30569 Document: 00516354106 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/13/2022
No. 21-30569

2

Davis contends that he is entitled to equitable tolling of the one-year 

limitation period of § 2255(f) based on his transfers between three Bureau of 

Prisons facilities and attendant lack of access to a law library at two of them; 

his placement in a special housing unit at each facility; his diminished mental 

capacity; the time it took him to locate and contact his trial counsel; and the 

delay in his receiving counsel’s case file caused by prison mailroom staff. In 

addition, Davis requests a COA to challenge the denial of his motion to alter 

or amend the judgment. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). Lastly, Davis appeals 

the district court’s decision not to conduct an evidentiary hearing on equitable tolling.

As an initial matter, we lack jurisdiction over the appeal of the denial 

of the Rule 59(e) motion because Davis failed to file a separate or amended 

notice of appeal following the denial of that motion. See Fed. R. App. 

P. 4(a)(4)(B)(ii); Funk v. Stryker Corp., 631 F.3d 777, 780–81 (5th Cir. 2011).

To obtain a COA to appeal the dismissal of his § 2255 motion, Davis 

must make “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 

28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). To meet that burden as to the district court’s timebar dismissal, he must show “at least, that jurists of reason would find it 

debatable whether the [motion] states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the 

district court was correct in its procedural ruling.” Slack v. McDaniel, 

529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). 

Davis fails to make the requisite showing. Accordingly, the motion for 

a COA is DENIED. Because Davis fails to make the required showing for a 

COA, we do not reach whether the district court erred by denying an evidentiary hearing. See United States v. Davis, 971 F.3d 524, 534–35 (5th Cir. 

2020), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 122 (2021). 

Case: 21-30569 Document: 00516354106 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/13/2022
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

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Eye Institute Special Emphasis Panel; NEI Clinical Grant Applications and Cooperative Agreements.                    

*Date:*                         April 12, 2010.                    

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate cooperative agreement applications.                    

*Place:*                         Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road, NW., Washington, DC 20015.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Anne E Schaffner, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Division of Extramural Research, National Eye Institute, 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 1300, Msc 9300, Bethesda, MD 20892-9300, (301) 451-2020,                         *aes@nei.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.867, Vision Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: February 25, 2010.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010-4584 Filed 3-5-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
# C_2016048EN.01009201.xml

| 8.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 48/92 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/92

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 17 December 2015 — Bowles v ECB

(Case F-94/14) (1)

1

((Civil service - ECB staff - Members of the Staff Committee - Remuneration - Salary - Additional increase in salary - Eligibility))

(2016/C 048/103)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Carlos Bowles (Frankfurt am Main, Germany) (represented by: L. Levi and M. Vandenbussche, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Central Bank (represented by: E. Carlini, S. Camilleri and M. López Torres, acting as Agents, B. Wägenbaur, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the Executive Board of the ECB not to grant the applicant an additional salary increase, in the context of the annual revision of salaries and bonuses for 2014.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1) | Annuls the decision of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank of 25 February 2014 not to grant an additional salary increase for 2014 to Mr Bowles; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Annuls the decision of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank of 25 February 2014 not to grant an additional salary increase for 2014 to Mr Bowles;

| 2) | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2)

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3) | The European Central Bank shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Mr Bowles. |
| --- | --- |

3)

The European Central Bank shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Mr Bowles.

---

(1)  OJ C 7, 12/1/2015, p. 49.

1

---
================================================================================


                                                                      Exhibit 32

                                  CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         I, Iehab Hawatmeh, Principal Executive Officer, and Principal Financial
Officer of CirTran Corporation (the "Company"), certify that:

         1. I have reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company;

         2. Based on my knowledge,  this  quarterly  report does not contain any
untrue  statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact  necessary
to make the  statements  made,  in light of the  circumstances  under which such
statements  were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
quarterly report; and

         3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information  included in this quarterly  report,  fairly present in all material
respects the financial  condition,  results of operations  and cash flows of the
Company as of, and for, the period presented in this quarterly report.

Date:  August 19, 2009


/s/ Iehab Hawatmeh
--------------------------------------------------------

Iehab Hawatmeh
Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7789 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7789

 To prohibit the Department of Defense from offering services through, 
        or maintaining a business relationship with, Tutor.com.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 21, 2024

 Ms. Stefanik introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit the Department of Defense from offering services through, 
        or maintaining a business relationship with, Tutor.com.

    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 ``Ban Chinese Communist Party Access 
to U.S. Military Students Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE USAGE OF TUTOR.COM.

    (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
            (1) The website Tutor.com is a long-standing provider of 
        tutoring services to members of the United States Armed Forces 
        and their families.
            (2) In January 2022, Primavera Capital Group, a Chinese-
        owned corporation associated with TikTok's parent company, 
        ByteDance, acquired Tutor.com and The Princeton Review (TPR 
        Education LLC) from ST Unitas.
            (3) While providing educational services, Tutor.com 
        collects personal data on users, such as location, internet 
        protocol addresses, and contents of the tutoring sessions.
            (4) As the national security laws of the People's Republic 
        of China require companies to release confidential business and 
        customer data to the Government of the People's Republic of 
        China, the United States is paying to expose the private 
        information of members of the United States Armed Forces and 
        their children to the Chinese Communist Party.
    (b) Prohibition.--
            (1) In general.--The Department of Defense shall--
                    (A) cease offering services through Tutor.com not 
                later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of 
                this Act; and
                    (B) terminate any business relationships with 
                Tutor.com as soon as legally possible.
            (2) Future relationships.--The Department shall not enter 
        into any other relationship with Tutor.com as long as Tutor.com 
        is owned by Primavera Capital Group or any other entity owned 
        or controlled by nationals of the People's Republic of China.
                                 <all>
```
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-14-0001017 30-JUN-2017 08:09 AM
RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATION

I, David F. Levy, President, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of InZon
Corporation (formerly W-J International, Ltd.);

2.	Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
to the period covered by this report;

3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;

4.	I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) [omitted pursuant to extended compliance period] for
the small business issuer and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused
such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under
our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the small business issuer, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report
is being prepared;

(b)  [omitted pursuant to extended compliance period]

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report
our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by
this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal
quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in
the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or
is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.	I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of
internal control over financial reporting, to the small business
issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business
issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize
and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves
management or other employees who have a significant role in
the small business issuer's internal control over financial
reporting.


Dated: May 21, 2006               By: /s/ David F. Levy
                                      ------------------
                                        David F. Levy, President
                                        Principal Executive Officer


<PAGE>
STATE OP NEW MAIVIPSIME 

Inter-Dopartwitt Communication 

FROM: Carole Richardson ~ 

Office of Legislative Budget Assistant 

State House, Room 102 

Concord, New Hampshire 03301 

DATE: July 2, 2004 

RE: 1~IS 04:122, FIS 04:123, FIS 04:124. FIS 04:125, FIS 04-126 and FIS 04:127 

TO: Michael Sclafani 

Department of Environniental Services 

Hazen Drive 

Concord, NH 03302 

Attached are the fiscal impact statements listed above. They should be reviewed and then 

submitted to the Division, of Administrative Rules, Office of Legislative Services, in accordance 

with the NIL Rulemaldne Manual dated September 2001. 

Attachments 
F 

LBAO 

FIS 04:126 

71?.104 

Fiscal Impact Statement for Department of Environmental Services rules governing Hot Mix Asphalt 

Plants. [Envy4 2700] ' ' 

1 . Comparison of the costs of the proposed rule(s) to the exlating rule(s): 

There are no costs attributable to either the proposed or existing rules. 

2. Cite the Fai`Isral mandate. Identify the impact on state funds: 

. There is no Federal mandate for these rules. However, these rules incorporate part of 

the Stiitelmf'plemeritation Plan which has been approved by the US Environmental 

' Protection . Agency pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act 42 U.S.C. Sectlon 7410. NQ 

impact on state'funds, . 

8: Cost and benefits of ths proposed rule(s): - 

Them are no -costs assocfated with tl* proposed full because, even if the existing rule 

were allowed to expire, affected sources would sdti be required to'compty with the federal 

rule-that Incorporates it at 40 CFR 52.1520. 

A. To State general or State speclal funds: 

None. 

B. To State cttl:.ens and political subdivisions: 

None. 

C. To Independently owned businesses: 

None.