alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
www.gpo.gov

### §558. Authorization of appropriations

There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums,1 as may be necessary to carry out the provisions and purposes of this chapter.

(Aug. 31, 1954, ch. 1156, §8, 68 Stat. 1011; Pub. L. 102–486, title XXV, §2504(d)(3), Oct. 24, 1992, 106 Stat. 3106.)

#### Amendments

1992—Pub. L. 102–486 struck out “not to exceed $500,000 annually,” after “such sums,”.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Daniel Alexander FRENKEL, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-50315.

D.C. No. CR-98-1261-RAP-1.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*512Submitted Feb. 12, 2001.1

Decided Feb. 23, 2001.

Before LEAVY, THOMAS, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

1

. The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM2

Daniel Alexander Frenkel appeals the 33-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Frenkel contends that the district court erred when it applied a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 for obstruction of justice because the district court’s findings were insufficient.

We review for clear error the district court’s factual findings that the defendant obstructed justice. *United States v. Ancheta,*38 F.3d 1114, 1117-18 (9th Cir. 1994). We review de novo whether the district court’s factual determinations were sufficient to support an enhancement under § 3C1.1. *United States v. Ford,*989 F.2d 347, 351 (9th Cir.1993).

The district court found that at his suppression hearing, Frenkel had “made statements that simply weren’t true,” and that these statements concerned a material issue. These findings were sufficient to support the application of an enhancement for obstruction of justice. *See*U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 cmt. n. 4(f) (listing the provision of providing “materially false information to a judge or magistrate” as an example of the type of conduct that warrants an enhancement for obstruction); *see also United States v. Sherwood,*98 F.3d 402, 415 (1996) (affirming the application of an enhancement pursuant to § 3C1.1 where the district court determined that a defendant gave false testimony at a suppression hearing concerning a material issue). Accordingly, the district court did not err by applying the enhancement. *See id.*

AFFIRMED.

2

. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
#### § 50.75 Determination of affiliations.

For the purposes of this subpart, an insurer's affiliates for any calendar year shall be determined by the circumstances existing on the date of the act which is the Program Trigger Event for that calendar year.
No. 99-8599.

#### Wolfe v. Louisiana.

Ct. App. La., 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

#### § 351.5 What is the maturity period of a Series EE savings bond?

Series EE savings bonds have a total maturity period of 30 years from the issue date, consisting of an original maturity period and one or two periods of extended maturity, which vary depending on the issue date of the bond. The interest on an outstanding bond ceases to accrue 30 years after its issue date.
EXHIBIT 32.2 – SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS
 
 Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 As Adopted Pursuant
 to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 
 
 
 I, Jon S. Verbeck, Chief Financial Officer,  Acting Principal Accounting Officer, and Treasurer of OP-TECH Environmental Services, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, to the best of my knowledge and belief, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
 
 (1)

the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June  30, 2011 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); 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: August 15, 2011
 /s/ Jon S. Verbeck
 Jon S. Verbeck
 Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer,
 Acting Principal Accounting Officer
#### C. and A. J. MATTHEWS, Respondents, v. THE PHOENIX INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant.

Springfield Court of Appeals,

February 6, 1911.

APPELLATE PRACTICE: Failure to File Brief. When appellant files in the appellate court nothing but a printed abstract — no statement or assignment of errors, as required by the statute and rules of the court, the appeal will be dismissed.

Appeal' from Scott Circuit *Court.*— Eon. *Henry G. Riley,*Judge.

*Oliver*cG *Oliver*and *Barclay, Fauntleroy &■ Gullen*for appellant.

*J. H. Hale*and *Frank Kelly*for respondents.

GRAY, J.

This cause is in this court on a transfer from the St. Louis Court of Appeals. Both parties have appeared generally in this court.

The suit originated before a justice of the peace, and is based on an insurance policy issued by the appellant, March 6, 1906. The plaintiffs were successful in the justice court. On trial in the circuit court, the plaintiffs were again successful, and the defendant ajjpealed.

The appellant has filed in this court a printed abstract in lieu of full transcript, but nothing more. No statement or assignment of errors, as required by the statute or our rules, has been filed. The result of such failure is the. dismissal of the appeal. [Wade v. Bankers Life Ins. Assn., 129 S. W. 1004; Disse v. Frank, 52 Mo. 551; Snyder v. Free, 102 Mo. 325, 14 S. W. 875; Halstead v. Stone, 147 Mo. 649, 49 S. W. 850.]

The appeal is dismissed.

All concur.
#### William Lynn LOGAN v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 52522.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Jan. 21, 1981.

J. W. Kellum, Sumner, for appellant.

Bill Allain, Atty. Gen. by Mark A. Chinn, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Before PATTERSON, C. J., and SUGG and WALKER, JJ.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Tallahatchie County; Andrew C. Baker, Judge.

Affirmed.
#### § 558.703 Penalty imposition.

If, after considering any written response to the Pre-Penalty Notice and any relevant facts, OFAC determines that there was a violation by the alleged violator named in the Pre-Penalty Notice and that a civil monetary penalty is appropriate, OFAC may issue a Penalty Notice to the violator containing a determination of the violation and the imposition of the monetary penalty. For additional details concerning issuance of a Penalty Notice, see appendix A to part 501 of this chapter. The issuance of the Penalty Notice shall constitute final agency action. The violator has the right to seek judicial review of that final agency action in federal district court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000725813
<NAME> YVETTE DESMARAIS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-28-1997
<CASH>                                         5650000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 20056000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    360000
<INVENTORY>                                   17909000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              46521000
<PP&E>                                        46351000
<DEPRECIATION>                                24067000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                81785000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         11572000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        863000
<OTHER-SE>                                    67560000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  81785000
<SALES>                                       48055000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              48055000
<CGS>                                         31762000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 31762000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               9710000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (160000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                6743000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   2156000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            4587000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   4587000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .56
        

</TABLE>
#### § 592.313 Voided certificate.

The term *voided certificate* means a Kimberley Process Certificate intended to be used for the exportation of rough diamonds from the United States that has been cancelled for reasons such as loss or error.

[83 FR 28373, June 19, 2018]
#### § 576.402 Effect of amendment.

Unless otherwise specifically provided, any amendment, modification, or revocation of any provision in or appendix to this part or chapter or of any order, regulation, ruling, instruction, or license issued by the Office of Foreign Assets Control does not affect any act done or omitted, or any civil or criminal proceeding commenced or pending, prior to such amendment, modification, or revocation. All penalties, forfeitures, and liabilities under any such order, regulation, ruling, instruction, or license continue and may be enforced as if such amendment, modification, or revocation had not been made.
§ 569.101 Relation of this part to other laws and regulations. This part is separate from, and independent of, the other parts of this chapter, with the exception of part 501 of this chapter, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements and license application and other procedures of which apply to this part. Actions taken pursuant to part 501 of this chapter with respect to the prohibitions contained in this part are considered actions taken pursuant to this part. Differing foreign policy and national security circumstances may result in differing interpretations of similar language among the parts of this chapter. No license or authorization contained in or issued pursuant to those other parts authorizes any transaction prohibited by this part. No license or authorization contained in or issued pursuant to any other provision of law or regulation authorizes any transaction prohibited by this part. No license or authorization contained in or issued pursuant to this part relieves the involved parties from complying with any other applicable laws or regulations. Note 1 to § 569.101 :
This part has been published in abbreviated form for the purpose of providing immediate guidance to the public. OFAC intends to supplement this part with a more comprehensive set of regulations, which may include additional interpretive and definitional guidance, general licenses, and statements of licensing policy.
HomeBureau of Energy ResourcesRemarks & Releases...Clean EDGE Asia: ENR’s Power Sector Program Provides Technical Support to the Bangladeshi System Operator

# 									Clean EDGE Asia: ENR’s Power Sector Program Provides Technical Support to the Bangladeshi System Operator							

Other Release

September 26, 2023

On September 17-18, ENR’s Power Sector Program’s implementer Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) held an in-person workshop for the Power Grid Company of Bangladesh (PGCB) and the National Load Dispatch Center on PNNL’s Power Plant Model Validation Tool and cybersecurity standards for control centers.  After enduring one of Bangladesh’s worst power outages earlier this year, PGCB is committed to improving system planning to enhance reliability, resilience, and security of the Bangladeshi grid as the country moves towards increased variable renewable energy integration and future interconnection with India.  PNNL will provide follow-on assistance on evaluating dynamic model data in the model validation tool as well as cybersecurity practices and policies. 

Tags

BangladeshBureau of Energy ResourcesEnergy

Back to Top
#### § 561.328 Reduce significantly, significantly reduced, and significant reduction.

The terms *reduce significantly,* *significantly reduced,* and *significant reduction,* used with respect to purchases from Iran of petroleum and petroleum products, include a reduction in such purchases in terms of price or volume toward a complete cessation of such purchases.

[78 FR 16408, Mar. 15, 2013]
Aina tt be aretine jase

Remyeeey lead Linteatinteeedincéslenreoan Low
breminnadanndateeationTM ” Lenataedl
Levsernit Tomewenrne Semen Chic. Sime | SERED Mtater Hs 1 we pe cet fy
=
= vet coemeded by Me Henan NA fe

oeeaces terrae eee

sence olen 5
Serent rea yl

=

Portoned 21 Wathngren IC
‘US, CEPARTENT OF COMMERCE

MATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMCSPVERT AtwotalT@a lion
NAMONAL OCEAN SERIE

AATIONEROC COMPOUM aeTURWALE. I METERS TO MADDMLLNA fort,

SSOPPULAMeeVTED F  DAeTEN tetas
DATUM tataed Mermeie terne Wate

‘fete
— i “2 —

a

a

we seoripetne sie ms ie BOSSLER
NOS NP 1-4

wee ete

PO
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2701

To repeal the requirement relating to specific statutory authorization for

increases in judicial salaries, to provide for automatic annual increases

for judicial salaries, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 30, 1995

Mr. WICKER (for himself, Mr. HEINEMAN, and Mrs. CLAYTON) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To repeal the requirement relating to specific statutory authorization for increases in judicial salaries, to provide

for automatic annual increases for judicial salaries, 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. JUDICIAL COST-OF-LIVING INCREASES.

4 (a) REPEAL OF STATUTORY REQUIREMENT RELAT5 ING TO JUDICIAL SALARIES.—Section 140 of the resolu6 tion entitled ‘‘A Joint Resolution making further continu7 ing appropriations for the fiscal year 1982, and for other
2

•HR 2701 IH

1 purposes.’’, approved December 15, 1981 (Public Law 97–

2 92; 95 Stat. 1200; 28 U.S.C. 461 note) is repealed.

3 (b) AUTOMATIC ANNUAL INCREASES.—Section

4 461(a) of title 28, United States Code, is amended to read

5 as follows:

6 ‘‘(a) Effective on the first day of the first applicable

7 pay period beginning on or after January 1 of each cal8 endar year, each salary rate which is subject to adjust9 ment under this section shall be adjusted by an amount,

10 rounded to the nearest multiple of $100 (or if midway be11 tween multiples of $100, to the next higher multiple of

12 $100) equal to the percentage of such salary rate which

13 corresponds to the most recent percentage change in the

14 Employment Cost Index, as determined under section

15 704(a)(1) of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989.’’.

Æ
#### § 590.802 Delegation of certain authorities of the Secretary of the Treasury.

Any action that the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to take pursuant to E.O. 13581 of July 24, 2011, as amended by E.O. 13863 of March 15, 2019, and any further Executive orders relating to the national emergency declared in E.O. 13581, may be taken by the Director of OFAC or by any other person to whom the Secretary of the Treasury has delegated authority so to act.
#### § 578.318 United States person; U.S. person.

The term *United States person* or *U.S. person* means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.
§ 590.407 Payments from blocked accounts to satisfy obligations prohibited. Pursuant to § 590.201, no debits may be made to a blocked account to pay obligations to U.S. persons or other persons, except as authorized by or pursuant to this part. Note 1 to § 590.407 .
*See also* § 590.502(e), which provides that no license or other authorization contained in or issued pursuant to this part authorizes transfers of or payments from blocked property or debits to blocked accounts unless the license or other authorization explicitly authorizes the transfer of or payment from blocked property or the debit to a blocked account.
#### § 526.312 Person.

The term *person* means an individual or entity.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Angeles
Partners XI 1997 Year-End 10-KSB and is qualified in its entirety by reference 
to such 10-KSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000702986
<NAME> ANGELES PARTNERS XI
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                             746
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      859
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          29,142
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,148
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  14,273
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         31,272
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    (18,558)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    14,273
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,160
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,871
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,917
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (673)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (16.81)<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-05-00556- CV Cha r le s Ho ffer be r , A ppe lla nt

v. Sharon Kerby and Wesley K erby, Appellees
F ROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF BELL CO UNTY NO. 49024 -3, HO NORAB LE GERALD M. B ROW N, JUDGE PRESIDI NG

ME MO R

A ND UMO P I N I O N Appellant Charle s Hoffe rber and appe llees Sharon Ke rby and Wesley

Ker by have informed the c ourt through counsel that they have a gree d to dismi ss this appeal. Ac cording ly , we grant the a g ree d motion and dismi ss the appea l. Tex. R . App. P. 42.1(a).

__________________________________________ J an P. Patterson, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice L aw, Justi ces Patter son and Pemberton Dismissed on Ag ree d Motion Filed: June 28, 2006
2010 Mobile A/C Climate Protection Partnership Annual Meeting Theme: The Importance of Professional Service Room Pavilion 4 , Rio Convention Center, Las Vegas

Wednesday , January

20 th 9:00 am

- 11:00 am 9 :00 International & National Action on Climate C hange: How MACs are affected Kristen Taddonio, EPA Climate Protection Partnerships Division 9:15 Significant New Alternatives Program Update Margaret Shepherd & Yaidi Cancel, EPA Stratospheric Protection Division 9:30 Fast Action in Protecting Climat e with New MAC Technology & Professional Service Sam L abudde, Environmental Investigation Agency , I nternational 9:45 SAE Air Conditioning Standards Ward Atkinson, SAE In terior Climate Control Committee 10:05 Preparing the Service Sector for New Refriger ant Mary Koban, DuPont & Paul DeGuiseppi, Mobile Air Conditioning Society Worldwide 10:20 The Global Importance of Containment and Professional Servicing with HFO

- 1234y f Stephen O. Andersen, Montreal Protocol Technology and Economic Assessment Panel & De borah Lueken, EPA Research Triangle Park 10:40 New Recognition Opportunities for the Service Sector Elvis Hoffpauir, MACS & Kristen Taddonio, EPA 11:00 Conclusions & Adjourn
#### § 582.601 Records and reports.

For provisions relating to required records and reports, see part 501, subpart C, of this chapter. Recordkeeping and reporting requirements imposed by part 501 of this chapter with respect to the prohibitions contained in this part are considered requirements arising pursuant to this part.
#### Schofield v. Schofield

*Stanley F. Manteas,*for plaintiff.

*George J. Ivins,*for defendant.

April 9, 1954.

Bok, P. J.,

Wife plaintiff’s action for divorce a. m. e. t. was completed to the point of final rule and was then terminated by reconciliation.

An order was made by us for counsel fees and costs against the husband, the final amount being $338. The wife now asks us to reduce this to judgment. The husband resists on the ground that a reconciliation suspends a divorce decree and the provision for alimony: by analogy he argues that costs and counsel fee should be suspended also.

There is a vast difference between alimony, on the one hand, and counsel fees and costs, on the other. It is obviously a matter of public policy to wipe out tne substantive procedure of divorce upon reconciliation, but public policy does not go so far as to present a reconciling couple with lawyers’ fees and costs free of charge. If the parties make it necessary that the wheels of justice turn, they should expect to pay for the necessary lubrication, and this is just as good public policy as the other. If it were otherwise, lawyers would be shy of representing parties to divorce actions for fear that reconciliation would destroy their fees: worse, it would disincline them to attempt to reconcile the parties.

The cases reflect this view: Richardson v. Richardson, 47 D. & C. 42 (1943); Borckman’s Appeal, 2 Walker 285; Yoder v. Yoder, 105 Wash. 491, 178 Pac. 474 (1918); McMakin v. Wickliffe, 16 Ky. L. R. 240.

Rule absolute.
#### § 591.405 Setoffs prohibited.

A setoff against blocked property (including a blocked account), whether by a U.S. bank or other U.S. person, is a prohibited transfer under § 591.201 if effected after the effective date.
#### § 515.308 Person.

The term *person* means an individual, partnership, association, corporation, or other organization.
#### § 578.307 Foreign person.

The term *foreign person* means any person that is not a U.S. person.