alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 5, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 39135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18726]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2008-0142]
RIN 2127-AK37


E-911 Grant Program

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Before a Federal agency can collect certain information from 
the public, it must receive approval from the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB). Under procedures established by the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (PRA), Federal agencies must solicit public comment on 
proposed collections of information, including extensions and 
reinstatements of previously approved collections before seeking OMB 
approval. This document provides notice of OMB's approval of the 
information collection and the assignment of a control number for the 
E-911 grant program.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laurie Flaherty, Office of Emergency 
Medical Services, NTI-140, telephone (202) 366-2705, fax (202) 366-
7721, NHTSA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 
U.S.C. 3501, et seq.), the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration and the National Telecommunications and Information 
Administration solicited public comments on the proposed collection of 
information, with a 60-day comment period, in the notice of proposed 
rulemaking published on October 3, 2008 (73 FR 57567). In a Federal 
Register notice published on May 19, 2009, the agencies announced that 
they submitted the information collection request to OMB for approval. 
(73 FR 23465). In the Final Rule published in the Federal Register on 
June 5, 2009 (74 FR 26965), the agencies announced that OMB approval of 
the information collection was pending. This document provides notice 
that OMB has approved the information collection and has assigned OMB 
control number 2127-0661 for the E-911 grant program.

    Issued on July 31, 2009.
Jeff Michael,
Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development, National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-18726 Filed 7-31-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 18

- 00242

- CV

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS

, Appellant

V

.

S.M. , Appellee §

§

§

§ On Appeal from County Criminal Court No. 4

of Tarrant County (1353168)

March 14, 2019

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

JU DGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no rev ers able error in the trial court’s June 28, 2018 order of nondisclosure . It is

ordered that the trial court ’s June 28, 2018 order of nondisclosure is affirm ed.

It is further ordered that appellant The State of Texas shall bear the costs of

this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

Justice Lee Gabriel
#### § 1.616-3 Time for making election with respect to returns due on or before May 2, 1960.

In the case of any taxable year beginning after December 31, 1953, and ending after August 16, 1954, the income tax return for which is due not later than May 2, 1960, the time to deduct or defer development expenditures for such a year under section 616 (a) or (b) shall expire on May 2, 1960.
america’s authentic government information

www.fdsys.gov
FDsys is...

 A Content Management System ensuring content integrity and authenticity

 A Preservation Repository guaranteeing long-term preservation and access to digital 

Government content

 An Advanced Search Engine combining extensive metadata creation with modern search 

technology

America’s Authentic Government Information 
Why FDsys?

 Access is free.

 About 50 different collections of Government information are available, including 

Congressional materials, Presidential publications, and Federal Agency resources. 

 Millions of documents are available, some dating back to the early 1900s.

 Searching is easy, advanced, and precise. 

 Authentic, digitally signed PDF documents are available, ensuring document integrity.

 The information is preserved for permanent public access. 

How Can I Use It?

 Search multiple publications from a single search box.

 Construct complex search queries.

 Narrow search results by filtering, sorting, and searching within results.

 Access multiple file formats for each search result.

 Access metadata in standard XML formats. 

 Browse by collection, Congressional committee, and date.

 Utilize a searchable online help system. 

www.fdsys.gov

Millions of free documents are available in FDsys, 

and more are added every day.
FDsys is a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office.

For additional information, contact the GPO Contact Center:

Toll-Free 866.512.1800

DC Metro 202.512.1800

ContactCenter@gpo.gov
§ 1.613-6 Statement to be attached to return when depletion is claimed on percentage basis. In addition to the requirements set forth in paragraph (g) of § 1.611-2, a taxpayer who claims the percentage depletion deduction under section 613 for any taxable year shall attach to his return for such year a statement setting forth in complete, summary form, with respect to each property for which such deduction is allowable, the following information: ( a ) All data necessary for the determination of the *gross income from the property,* as defined in §§ 1.613-3 from 1.613-4, including: ( 1 ) Amounts paid as rents or royalties including amounts which the recipient treats under section 631(c),
( 2 ) Proportion and amount of bonus excluded, and
( 3 ) Amounts paid to holders of other interests in the mineral deposit.
( b ) All additional data necessary for the determination of the *taxable income from the property (computed without the allowance for depletion*), as defined in § 1.613-5.
[T.D. 7170, 37 FR 5382, Mar. 15, 1972]
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14** 
**- 1190** 

TONY BERT TANG ,
Petitioner ,

v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General , Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

.

Submitted : September 19, 2014 Decided: October 2, 2014

Before WYNN and FLOYD , Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.

Oleh R. Tustaniwsky, Brooklyn, New York , for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General , Mary Jane Candaux, Assistant Director, Robbin K. Blaya , Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Tony Bert Tang, a native and citizen of Indonesia,
petition s for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration
judge’s de cision denying his requests for asylum and withholding

of removal. * We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including
the various documentary exhibits relevant to country conditions

in Indonesia and the transcript of Tang’s merits hearing

. We

conclude th at the record evidence does not compel a ruling
contrary to any of the administrative findings of fact, see 8

U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (20 12 ), and that substantial evidence
supports the Board’s decision. See INS v. Elias

– Zacarias , 502
U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for
review for the reasons stated by the Board. See In re: Tang

(B.I.A. Feb. 5, 2014 ). We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

m aterials before th is court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

* Tang does not challenge the denial of relief under the Convention Against Torture. Accordingly, review of that issue is waived. Ngarurih v. Ashcroft , 371 F.3d 182, 189 n. 7 (4th Cir. 2004).
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 221 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                            H. CON. RES. 221

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

                Correcting the enrollment of H.R. 3159.
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 221

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That, in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 3159, the Clerk of the House 
of Representatives shall make the following corrections:
            (1) In section 5902(b) proposed to be inserted in title 49, 
        United States Code, by section 204(b), strike ``electric'' and 
        insert ``electronic''.
            (2) In section 204(e)(1), by inserting after 
        ``respectively'' the following: ``, and by moving the text of 
        paragraph (2), as so redesignated down 1 line and to the left, 
        flush full measure and indenting such paragraph''.
            (3) In section 205(1), by inserting ``in subsection (a)'' 
        before ``a comma''.
            (4) In paragraph (4) of section 5905(a) proposed to be 
        inserted in title 49, United States Code, by section 206, after 
        ``(c),'', move the remainder of the text of the paragraph down 
        1 line and to the left, flush full measure.
            (5) In section 206(2), by striking ``9(b)(1)'' and 
        inserting ``(b)(1)''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 26, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
From: Topham.Nathan@epamail.epa.gov

From: Mark Morris/RTP/USEPA/US

To: "Teresa S. Bowers" <TBOWERS@gradientcorp.com>, "Stotts, Stacy" <SStotts@stinson.com>, "Marucheau, Louis" <lmarucheau@doerun.com>, "'Miller, Aaron'" <amiller@doerun.com>, Joe Stolle <joseph@shellengr.com>, Nathan Topham/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Michael Stewart/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Sharon Nizich/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Dave Guinnup/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Steve Fruh/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Jan Tierney/DC/USEPA/US@EPA,

Ted Palma/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Richard Daye/R7/USEPA/US@EPA, bern.johnson@dnr.mo.gov

Date: 04/12/2011 03:41 PM Subject

: Doe Run Property Map

All, Attached is a property boundary map (and shapefile) we created to use in excluding model receptors that are within property boundaries of Doe Run. There were two maps used to create the attached map: 1) the Doe Run property map provided by Terri Bowers, and 2) a boundary map provided by the MO DNR. Although the map Terri provided includes all Doe Run property, it is not contiguous. This is because there are some parcels not owned by Doe Run within the overall extents of Doe Run's property. We must not exclude model receptors within these parcels. The MO DNR seems to have a contiguous boundary map; however, it doesn't seem to include all of Doe Run's property (e.g.,

wooded areas to the south). We created the attached map to hopefully capture all of Doe Run's property that is contiguous. We intend to use the attached map for any future analysis of Doe Run. Please let us know if you think the boundaries should be different than the attached map.

Thanks.

Page 1Mark Morris

USEPA Mailcode C539-02

109 TW Alexander Drive

RTP, NC 27711 (919) 541-5416 morris.mark@epa.gov

Page 2
III

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 258

To refer S. 974 entitled ‘‘A bill for the relief of Richard Kanehl of Mobile,

Alabama.’’ to the chief judge of the United States Court of Federal

Claims for a report thereon.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 19 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 12), 1994

Mr. HEFLIN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

To refer S. 974 entitled ‘‘A bill for the relief of Richard

Kanehl of Mobile, Alabama.’’ to the chief judge of the

United States Court of Federal Claims for a report

thereon.

1 Resolved, That, as a supplement to S. Res. 108 of

2 the 103d Congress, the bill S. 974 entitled ‘‘A bill for the

3 relief of Richard Kanehl of Mobile, Alabama.’’ now pend4 ing in the Senate, together with all the accompanying pa5 pers, is referred to the chief judge of the United States

6 Court of Federal Claims. The chief judge shall proceed

7 with the same in accordance with the provisions of sections

8 1492 and 2509 of title 28, United States Code, notwith-
2

•SRES 258 IS

1 standing the bar of any statute of limitations, laches, res

2 judicata, collateral estoppel, or bar of sovereign immunity,

3 and report thereon to the Senate, at the earliest prac4 ticable date, giving such findings of fact and conclusions

5 thereon as shall be sufficient to inform the Congress of

6 the nature and character of the demand as a claim, legal

7 or equitable, against the United States or a gratuity and

8 the amount, if any, legally or equitably due to the claim9 ants from the United States. In complying with this reso10 lution, the Court of Federal Claims is requested to con11 sider the records of any previous trial of the issues in this

12 case, including the records of Merchants National Bank

13 v. United States (7 Cl. Ct. 1; 1984).

Æ
427 A.2d 1225

#### Commonwealth v. Hall, Appellant.

Submitted November 16, 1979.

Jack Sparacino, for appellant;

James J. Conte, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

*631Before SPAETH, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.

The judgment of sentence of the lower court is hereby affirmed.
Cite as 2014 Ark. 358

SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS

IN RE ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER

NO. 17 — PROFESSIONAL

PRACTICUM RULE

Opinion Delivered September 4, 2014

PER CURIAM

The purpose of this order is to memorialize the application fee that has been set in the

amount of $125.00 for applicants to take the professional practicum established by

Administrative Order No. 17. Remittances of the fee shall be made by money order or

cashier's check payable to the Clerk of the Supreme Court.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 148 (Tuesday, August 4, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38676-38677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18669]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[ File No. 500-1]


 In the Matter of Gulf Alternative Energy Corporation; Order of 
Suspension of Trading

July 31, 2009.

    It appears to the Securities and Exchange Commission that there is 
a lack of current and accurate information concerning the securities of 
Gulf Alternative Energy Corporation (trading symbol: GAEC) because of 
questions regarding the accuracy and adequacy of information contained 
in press releases and on its website regarding the quality of the 
company's technology and the company's business prospects and 
agreements.
    The Commission is of the opinion that the public interest and the 
protection of the investors require a suspension of trading in the 
securities of Gulf Alternative Energy Corporation.
    Therefore, it is ordered, pursuant to Section 12(k) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, that trading in the securities of the 
above-listed company is suspended for the period from 9:30 a.m. EDT, 
July 31, 2009, through 11:59 p.m. EDT, on August 13, 2009.


[[Page 38677]]


    By the Commission.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-18669 Filed 7-31-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P
#### Flora A. NORMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 01-6434.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

June 19, 2002.

Before COLE and GILMAN, Circuit Judges; MILLS, District Judge.*

*

The Honorable Richard Mills, United States District Judge for the Central District of Illinois, sitting by designation.

Flora A. Norman, proceeding pro se, appeals a district court judgment that affirmed the Commissioner’s denial of her claim for social security disability benefits. The case has been referred to this panel pursuant to Rule 34(j)(l), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. We unanimously agree that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 84(a).

In her sole contention preserved for appeal, Norman argues that the Commissioner erred by not ordering a consultative examination. Both parties have filed briefs.

Upon review, we conclude that the Commissioner did not err by failing to order a consultative examination. It is the claimant’s burden to prove that she is disabled. She is responsible for furnishing evidence that can be used to reach the conclusion that she is disabled. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1512(a). Only under special circumstances — when a claimant is without counsel, not capable of presenting an effective case, and unfamiliar with hearing procedures — does the ALJ have a special duty to develop the record. *Lashley v. Secretary of Health and Human Servs.,*708 F.2d 1048, 1051-52 (6th Cir.1983). Norman was represented by counsel at the administrative level; therefore, the Commissioner had no special duty in this case.

Our review otherwise indicates that the record was adequate.

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Rule 34(j)(2)(C), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

May 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

132951 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 132951 

 COA: 263600 

Wayne CC: 04-002090-01 

RICHARD BROWN, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 28, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0521 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

May 30, 2007 

 Clerk
IV

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 197

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Department of Energy should

suspend spent nuclear fuel and radioactive target material reprocessing

activities.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 10, 1996

Mr. MARKEY (for himself and Mr. SHAYS) submitted the following concurrent

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on National Security, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such

provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Department

of Energy should suspend spent nuclear fuel and radioactive target material reprocessing activities.

Whereas reprocessing is a procedure used to separate plutonium and highly enriched uranium from spent nuclear

fuel;

Whereas plutonium and highly enriched uranium constitute

the fundamental materials used in a nuclear weapon;

Whereas the United States engaged in reprocessing in support of its nuclear weapons program from 1945 until

1992;
2

•HCON 197 IH

Whereas in the years after 1992, the need for further reprocessing for military purposes has been obviated by significant reductions in the United States nuclear weapons arsenal;

Whereas reprocessing has been proposed as a means for the

management of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive target

material;

Whereas in recognition of the serious proliferation risks associated with reprocessing, the United States has renounced reprocessing for either civilian or military purposes;

Whereas reprocessing poses a danger to the environment,

since reprocessing creates additional radioactive wastes;

Whereas the economic costs of reprocessing are high, and

more cost-effective alternatives may be available for spent

nuclear fuel management;

Whereas the Department of Energy has requested approximately $300,000,000 for reprocessing activities at the

Savannah River site in South Carolina and $50,000,000

for a new form of reprocessing called pyroprocessing activities at Argonne National Laboratory-West in Idaho;

and

Whereas the Department of Energy has not sufficiently explored the alternative methods for treatment of spent nuclear fuel which may prove to be more cost-effective, environmentally sound, and proliferation resistant than reprocessing: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the

3 Department of Energy should suspend its spent nuclear
3

•HCON 197 IH

1 fuel and radioactive target material reprocessing activities

2 and postpone plans for further reprocessing.

Æ
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-7663
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee,
v. JOSE RICO-GOMEZ, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:06-cr-00147-RJC; 3:07-cv-00388-RJC) Submitted: February 21, 2008 Decided: February 27, 2008 Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jose Rico-Gomez, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Jose Rico-Gomez seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. SeeMiller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Rico-Gomez has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED