alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### CECIL D. ROSS v. THE UNITED STATES.

[49 O. Ols. R., 55; 239 U. S. R., 530.]

*On the defendants’ appeal.*

A private in the Infantry service was transferred as a private to the Hospital Corps of the Army and immediately on his arrival at the general hospital at the Presidio, San Francisco, he was assigned to duty in the telephone and telegraph office at the hospital and was on duty there from November 9, 1900, to April 24,1903, except at short intervals when he was sick. The records of the War Department show that he was carried *481on the reports as “ telegraph operator ” and this suit is to recover “ extra duty pay,” under section 1287, R. S., and the act of July 5,1884. 23 Stat. L., 107, 110.

The court below decides:

Upon the question of the necessity for a written order detailing an enlisted man on “ extra-duty pay ” the case of *EoltJiaus*v. *U. 8.,*42 0. Cls., 544, is controlling and here followed.

Where the actual employment of an enlisted man in the telephone and telegraph office of a hospital for a comparatively long period of his enlisted service is known personally to the officers in charge of said hospital, and he is carried on the regular returns as a “ telegraph operator,” he is entitled to the “ extra-duty ” pay ” provided by law.

Section 1287, R. S., refers to artificers and laborers, and the act of March 3, 1885, 23 Stat. U., 359, refers to mechanics, artisans, school-teachers, and “ clerks ” at headquarters in one class, and “ other clerks, teamsters, laborers, and other enlisted men on extra duty,” and the latter act is amendatory to section 1287, R. S., and enlarges in a way the classes referred to therein.

The decision of the court below is reversed.

Mr. Justice Hughes

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court January 10,1916.
#### § 576.316 U.S. financial institution.

The term *U.S. financial institution* means any U.S. entity (including its foreign branches) that is engaged in the business of accepting deposits, making, granting, transferring, holding, or brokering loans or credits, or purchasing or selling foreign exchange, securities, commodity futures or options, or procuring purchasers and sellers thereof, as principal or agent. It includes but is not limited to depository institutions, banks, savings banks, trust companies, securities brokers and dealers, commodity futures and options brokers and dealers, forward contract and foreign exchange merchants, securities and commodities exchanges, clearing corporations, investment companies, employee benefit plans, and U.S. holding companies, U.S. affiliates, or U.S. subsidiaries of any of the foregoing. This term includes those branches, offices, and agencies of foreign financial institutions that are located in the United States, but not such institutions' foreign branches, offices, or agencies.
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19

- 1833 V

UNPUBLISHED

KLAUDIA AUBUCHON

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: February 27, 2020

Vaccine Rule 21(a); No Judgment;

Order Concluding Proceedings ;

Mot ion to Voluntarily Dismiss

Alan K. Nicollette, Nordstrom, Steele

, Tu stin, CA , for petitioner.

Voris Edward Johnson , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

ORDER CONCLUDING PROCEEDINGS 1

On February 24, 2020

, P etitioner filed a Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss pursuant to

Vaccine Rule 21(a) in the above

- captioned case. In support of this Motion, Petitioner

states that a petition was previously filed on behalf of Petitioner by another counsel.

The Vaccine Act states that “[o]nly one petition may be filed with respect to each

administration of a vaccine.” 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 11(b)(2). Thus, Petitioner’s motion is

GRANTED.

Accordingly, p ursuant to Vaccine Rule 21 (a), the above

- captioned case is

hereby dismissed without prejudice

. The Clerk of the Court is hereby instructed that

a judgment shall not enter in the instant case pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am

required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of

Electronic Government Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to

the internet. In accorda nce with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to

redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of

privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such

material from public access.

.
II

Calendar No. 371

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2695

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

APRIL 17, 1996

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar

AN ACT

To extend the deadline under the Federal Power Act applicable to the construction of certain hydroelectric projects

in the State of Pennsylvania.

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

HR 2695 PCS

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE.

2 (a) EXTENSION.—Notwithstanding the time limita3 tions of section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C.

4 806), upon the request of the licensee for the project con5 cerned, and after reasonable notice, the Federal Energy

6 Regulatory Commission shall, in accordance with the good

7 faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of

8 such section 13 and the Commission’s procedures under

9 such section, extend the time required for commencement

10 of construction of each the following projects until Sep11 tember 26, 1999:

12 (1) FERC Project No. 4474.

13 (2) FERC Project No. 7041.

14 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This section shall take effect

15 for the project upon the expiration of the extension (issued

16 by the Commission under section 13 of the Federal Power

17 Act (16 U.S.C. 806)) of the period required for commence18 ment of construction of the project concerned.

Passed the House of Representatives April 16, 1996.

Attest: ROBIN H. CARLE,

Clerk.

Calendar No. 371

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2695

AN ACT

To extend the deadline under the Federal Power

droelectric projects in the State of Pennsylvania.Act applicable to the construction of certain hyAPRIL 17, 1996

Received; read twice and placed on the calendar
V

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2663

To waive the time limitation specified by law for the award of certain military

decorations in order to allow the award of the Congressional Medal

of Honor to Alfred Rascon for actions while a member of the United

States Army during the Vietnam era.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 17, 1995

Mr. EVANS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on National Security

A BILL

To waive the time limitation specified by law for the award

of certain military decorations in order to allow the

award of the Congressional Medal of Honor to Alfred

Rascon for actions while a member of the United States

Army during the Vietnam era.

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

3 That the time limitations specified in section 6248(a) of

4 title 10, United States Code, shall not apply with respect

5 to the award of the Congressional Medal of Honor under

6 section 6241 of such title to Alfred Rascon for acts of her-
2

•HR 2663 IH

1 oism during the Vietnam era while a member of the

2 United States Army.

Æ
#### § 562.313 Aluminum sector of Iran.

The term *aluminum sector of Iran* means the mining, refining, processing, or manufacturing of aluminum or aluminum products in Iran.

[84 FR 38549, Aug. 7, 2019]
# Minority Enterprise Development Week, 2009

Our Nation’s strength rests on the ingenuity and creativity of the American people. Across our country, almost 4 million minority-owned firms exemplify this spirit as they create jobs, develop new products and services, and promote community and economic development. The growth and expansion of these businesses is an increasingly critical part of our economic recovery and long-term prosperity.

At a time when too many Americans are facing extraordinary economic challenges, supporting the development of minority-owned enterprises will help accelerate the revitalization of our economy. Of the 630,000 minority-owned employer firms, these businesses are providing employment and stability to 4.7 million workers while renewing urban neighborhoods and rural communities. They represent a key component of future growth for our economy.

Minority Enterprise Development Week is an opportunity to commemorate the tremendous value minority entrepreneurs and their employees bring to our economy and our Nation as a whole. They embody the timeless American values of hard work, integrity, and optimism. They also serve as role models to countless children who want to start their own business or reach their personal goals. Through their accomplishments and example, these leaders affirm that, with determination and commitment, every American can achieve his or her potential and live out their dreams.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States do hereby proclaim August 23 through August 29, 2009, as Minority Enterprise Development Week. I call upon all Americans to celebrate this week with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities to recognize the many contributions of our Nation’s minority enterprises.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twentieth day of August, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth.

[FR Doc. E9-20693

Billing code 3195-W9-P
§ 550.510 Official business of certain international organizations and entities. All transactions prohibited by this part that are for the conduct of the official business of the following entities by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof are authorized: ( a ) The United Nations, including its Programmes, Funds, and Other Entities and Bodies, as well as its Specialized Agencies and Related Organizations;
( b ) The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA);
( c ) The African Development Bank Group, the Asian Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the Inter-American Development Bank Group (IDB Group), including any fund entity administered or established by any of the foregoing;
( d ) The International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies; and
( e ) The African Union, including the African Union Commission and other subsidiary bodies and organs.
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2683

To amend title 5, United States Code, to extend to employees of the Federal

Bureau of Investigation certain procedural and appeal rights with respect

to certain adverse personnel actions.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 28, 1995

Mr. WOLF (for himself, Mrs. MORELLA, and Mr. DAVIS) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Government Reform

and Oversight

A BILL

To amend title 5, United States Code, to extend to employees

of the Federal Bureau of Investigation certain procedural

and appeal rights with respect to certain adverse personnel actions.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Due Process for FBI

5 Agents Act’’.
2

•HR 2683 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF RIGHTS.

2 Section 7511(b)(8) of title 5, United States Code, is

3 amended by striking ‘‘the Federal Bureau of Investiga4 tion,’’.

5 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

6 The amendment made by this Act shall apply with

7 respect to any personnel action taking effect after the end

8 of the 45-day period beginning on the date of the enact9 ment of this Act.

Æ
- Office Home
- About Us
- Defining Racial Equity
- Remarks and Releases
- Global Anti-Racism Champions
- Key Stakeholders
- FAQs

HomeBureaus & Offices > Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor...Office of the Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice

# Office of the Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice

## 				Our Mission			

					The Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice (SRREJ) advances the human rights of members of marginalized racial, ethnic, and Indigenous communities, including people of African descent, and builds global partnerships to combat systemic racism, discrimination, and xenophobia globally. In June 2022, Desirée Cormier Smith was appointed as the State Department’s first-ever Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice.				

Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice

Desirée Cormier Smith

							Follow Us:																			Twitter

## 							Key Topics						

        -  											Defining Racial Equity										 
        -  											Global Anti-Racism Champions 										 
        -  											Key Stakeholders										 
        -  											Remarks and Releases 										 
        -  											FAQs 										 

### 											Defining Racial Equity											

Equity addresses the specific and proportionate needs of certain persons or populations to attain fair and just treatment and outcomes
													Learn More About Defining Racial Equity													Defining Racial Equity

### 											Global Anti-Racism Champions 											

In August 2023, the Special Representative created and implemented the first annual Secretary of State's Award for Global Anti-Racist Champions.
													Learn More About Global Anti-Racism Champions 													Global Anti-Racism Champions 

### 											Key Stakeholders											

The Special Representative seeks to engage with all marginalized communities around the world, but some of the largest stakeholders in this work include people of African descent, Indigenous communities, and Roma persons.
													Learn More about Key Stakeholders													Key Stakeholders

### 											Remarks and Releases 											

Find remarks by the Special Representative and other releases related to the Office of the Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice
													Learn More About Remarks and Releases 													Remarks and Releases 

### 											FAQs 											

Race and ethnicity are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same thing. Learn why and find answers to other frequently asked questions about the State Department’s racial equity and justice work.
													Learn More About FAQs													FAQs 

Back to Top
#### § 552.801 Procedures.

For license application procedures and procedures relating to amendments, modifications, or revocations of licenses; administrative decisions; rulemaking; and requests for documents pursuant to the Freedom of Information and Privacy Acts (5 U.S.C. 552 and 552a), see part 501, subpart E, of this chapter.
#### Donald F. ROBERTS v. STATE of Louisiana, Through the DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS.

No. 55131.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 20, 1974.

In re: Donald F. Roberts, applying for Certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Jackson. 295 So.2d 865.

Application denied. On the facts found by the court of appeal, there is no error in their judgment.
#### Steven Wayne THOMAS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-820.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 19, 1974.

*89Robert F. Nunez, St. Petersburg, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Richard C. Booth, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Thomas, was indicted for the premeditated murder of his one-month old daughter. A jury verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree resulted in the imposition of a sentence of six months to twenty years. The case against Thomas was essentially circumstantial, as is often true in cases of this nature.

The evidence demonstrates that the child was murdered. The evidence was sufficient to show that appellant had mistreated the baby in the past and had threatened to kill her. Yet, the evidence that appellant committed the act was circumstantial.

When circumstantial evidence is relied upon for conviction, the circumstances when taken together must lead to a reasonable and moral certainty that the accused, and no one else, committed the offense. LaMonte v. State, Fla.App.2nd, 1962, 145 So.2d 889.

We doubt that it can be said that the evidence was such as to lead one to a moral certainty that appellant, *and no one else,*committed the crime because there is a reasonable alternative hypothesis that the child was killed by her mother.

However, the evidence reflects that appellant and the mother were together with the baby at a time when the jury had a right to believe the killing was accomplished. Considering the totality of the evidence, we, at the very least, believe it was sufficient to convict appellant as an aider and abetter. See Newman v. State, Fla. 1967, 196 So.2d 897. The fact that no instruction on aiding and abetting was requested or given would not prevent such a conviction. State v. Roby, Fla. 1971, 246 So.2d 566. The only reasonable alternative hypothesis to guilt on the murder charge is guilt as an aider and abetter.

We have reviewed the record on appeal and heard oral argument by counsel. We conclude that there was sufficient, competent evidence in the instant case to support the conviction of either second-degree murder or aiding and abetting.

*90We have reviewed the many other questions raised by the appellant and find them' to be without merit.

Affirmed.

McNULTY, a. C. J., and BOARDMAN and GRIMES, JJ., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 42923]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20466]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-71,571]


Interdent Service Corporation; Stockton, CA; Notice of 
Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an 
investigation was initiated in response to a petition filed on July 7, 
2009 by a company official on behalf of workers of InteDent Service 
Corporation, Stockton, California.
    The petitioning group of workers is covered by an earlier petition 
(TA-W-71,328) filed on June 22, 2009 that is the subject of an ongoing 
investigation for which a determination has not yet been issued. 
Further investigation in this case would duplicate efforts and serve no 
purpose; therefore the investigation under this petition has been 
terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of August 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-20466 Filed 8-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
EXHIBIT 32.2




CERTIFICATION


Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section
302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of China Swine Genetics, Inc.
(the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
Tongyu Zhang, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:





(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Date:
      May 20, 2010
            By:  
      /s/ Tongyu
      ZhangName:
      Tongyu ZhangTitle:
      Chief Financial Officer
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Noel D. YAMBO, Ricardo Torres and William D. Yambo.

No. 81-K-0458.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 19, 1981.

In re Noel D. Yambo, Ricardo Torres and William D. Yambo, applying for writs of habeas corpus, remedial writs and stay order. Parish of Jefferson. No. 81-374.

Writ granted in part. The trial court is ordered to hold preliminary hearings and bail hearings for Ricardo Torres and William Yambo not later than February 26, 1981; the state is ordered to respond to the application of Noel Yambo not later than February 24, 1981.
FILED 

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 

 July 12, 2005 

 THOMAS K. KAHN 

 CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 05-10189

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 03-81070-CV-KLR

BRANDON P. MOORE, 

on behalf of himself and all 

others similarly situated, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

versus 

TRACTOR SUPPLY CO., 

Defendant-Appellee. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

_________________________

(July 12, 2005)

Before TJOFLAT, ANDERSON and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
2

We find that the district court properly granted summary judgment in this

Fair Labor Standards Act case because the plaintiff fit within the executive

exception to federally mandated overtime pay.

AFFIRMED.