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

97 items

        -    Press Statement  		Austria National Day	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 26, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Under Secretary Jenkins to Participate in the IAEA General Conference In Vienna, Austria, September 24-28	  September 22, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		The United States Reaffirms Commitment to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons	  Matthew MillerJuly 31, 2023 
        -    Report  		2023 Investment Climate Statements: 	  July 26, 2023 
        -    Report  		2023 Trafficking in Persons Report: Austria	  June 15, 2023 
        -    DipNote  		Transatlantic Fellow Program Deepens Bonds Between United States and Europe	  June 2, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Austria	  May 15, 2023 
        -    Media Note  		Ad Hoc Committee to Elaborate a UN Cybercrime Convention Fifth Negotiating Session at the United Nations in Vienna	  April 11, 2023 
        -    DipNote  		The Innovation Station Travels to Austria, Hungary, and Slovenia	  March 28, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Austria	  March 20, 2023 

previous page12345…10next page

Back to Top
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-7182

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

STERLING WHITAKER,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (7:19-cr-00129-BO-2; 7:21-cv-00033-

BO)

Submitted: December 21, 2021 Decided: December 27, 2021

Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Sterling Whitaker, Appellant Pro Se. David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7182 Doc: 6 Filed: 12/27/2021 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Sterling Whitaker seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely

his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 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)(B). 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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a 

prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the 

district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. 

Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural 

grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is 

debatable and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. 

Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,

484 (2000)). 

Limiting our review of the record to the issues raised in Whitaker’s informal brief,

we conclude that Whitaker has not made the requisite showing. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b); see 

also Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an 

important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved 

in that brief.”). 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 this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

DISMISSED

USCA4 Appeal: 21-7182 Doc: 6 Filed: 12/27/2021 Pg: 2 of 2
# C_2005191EN.01000301.xml

| 5.8.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 191/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.8.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 191/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3817 — Wegener/PCM/JV)

(2005/C 191/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 7 July 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/ ). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes. |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/ ). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes.

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3817. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3817. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
§ 802.601 General. ( a ) In any assessment, review, or investigation of a covered real estate transaction, the Committee should consider the factors specified in section 721(f), as applicable, and, as appropriate, require the parties to provide to the Committee the information necessary to consider such factors. The Committee's assessment, review, or investigation (if necessary) shall examine, as appropriate, whether: ( 1 ) The transaction is a covered real estate transaction;
( 2 ) There is credible evidence to support a belief that any foreign person party to a covered real estate transaction might take action that threatens to impair the national security of the United States; and
( 3 ) Provisions of law, other than section 721 and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, provide adequate and appropriate authority to protect the national security of the United States.
( b ) During an assessment, review, or investigation, the Staff Chairperson may invite the parties to a notified transaction to attend a meeting with the Committee staff to discuss and clarify issues pertaining to the transaction. During an investigation, a party to the transaction under investigation may request a meeting with the Committee staff; such a request ordinarily will be granted.
( c ) The Staff Chairperson shall be the point of contact for receiving material filed with the Committee, including notices and declarations.
( d ) Where more than one lead agency is designated, communications on material matters between a party to the transaction and a lead agency shall include all lead agencies designated with regard to those matters.
( e ) The parties' description of a transaction in a declaration or notice does not limit the ability of the Committee to, as appropriate, assess, review, or investigate, or exercise any other authorities available under section 721 with respect to any covered real estate transaction that the Committee identifies as having been notified to the Committee based upon the facts set forth in the declaration or notice, any additional information provided to the Committee subsequent to the original declaration or notice, or any other information available to the Committee.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7535

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JAVIER CERVERA, a/k/a Jason,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. John A. MacKenzie, Senior District

Judge. (CR-88-33-N, CA-95-610-N)

Submitted: January 11, 1996 Decided: January 24, 1996

Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Susan Graham James, Montgomery, Alabama, for Appellant. Robert

Williams Wiechering, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria,

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1988) motion. We have reviewed the record and the

district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v.

Cervera, Nos. CR-88-33-N; CA-95-610-N (E.D. Va. July 28, 1995). 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.

AFFIRMED
```

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 166 (Friday, August 28, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 44375]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20775]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    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 Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel. Cardiopulmonary and Hematology Grant 
Opportunities (ARRA).
    Date: September 2, 2009.
    Time: 12 p.m. to 3 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, 
Bethesda, MD 20892. (Telephone Conference Call)
    Contact Person: Robert Blaine Moore, PhD, Scientific Review 
Officer, Review Branch/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood 
Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7213, Bethesda, MD 20892. 301-
594-8394. [email protected].
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, 
National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and 
Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, 
Blood Diseases and Resources Research; 93.701, ARRA Related 
Biomedical Research and Research Support Awards., National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: August 21, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-20775 Filed 8-27-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 6, 2016

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 15

- 01062

- CV

IN THE MATTER OF M.A .B.

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No 1

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 11

- CJV

- 016634

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

This is an appeal from a n order of transfer to the Institutional Division of the

Texas Department of Criminal Justice signed November 5, 2015

. The reporter’s

record was filed on March 4, 2016. The clerk’s record was filed March 18, 2016

.

No brief was filed.

On June 28, 2016 , this court issued an order stating that unless appellant

submitted a brief on or before July 19, 2016 , the court would dismiss the appeal for

w ant of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P . 42.3(b).2

Appellant filed no response. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Busby, Donovan, and Brown

.
HomeBureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability...Bureau of Arms Control Verification and Compliance  Releases

# Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability Releases

124 items

        -    Report  		Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments	   
        -    Report  		2021 Adherence to and Compliance With Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament  Agreements and Commitments	  April 15, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		OPCW Charges Syrian Regime with Chemical Weapons Attack	  Ned PriceApril 14, 2021 
        -    Fact Sheet  		New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms of the United States and the Russian Federation, February 2011 – September 2020	  March 5, 2021 
        -    Video Remarks  		Secretary Blinken's Remarks to the Conference on Disarmament	  Antony J. BlinkenFebruary 22, 2021 
        -    		Renaming of the National and Nuclear Risk Reduction Center	  February 8, 2021 
        -    Fact Sheet  		New START Treaty Mythbusters	  February 3, 2021 
        -    Press Statement  		On the Extension of the New START Treaty with the Russian Federation	  Antony J. BlinkenFebruary 3, 2021 
        -    		Alexandra Bell	  January 20, 2021 
        -    		Bureau of Arms Control, Deterrence, and Stability	  January 20, 2021 

previous page1…10111213next page

Back to Top
EXHIBIT 32.2



BIOVEST INTERNATIONAL, INC.



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual report of Biovest International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
James A. McNulty, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



(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 result of operations of the Company.



|                                                         
|---------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ James A. McNulty                                     
|James A. McNulty Chief Financial Officer February 2, 2005
HomeItaly

# Italy

262 items

        -    TIAS  		Italy (09-929) – Agreement for Cooperation in Civilian Nuclear Energy Research and Development	  September 29, 2009 
        -    TIAS  		Italy (09-821) – Agreement Concerning Protection and Preservation of Places of Commemoration	  August 21, 2009 
        -    TIAS  		Italy (09-503) – Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Reciprocal Defense Procurement	  May 3, 2009 
        -    TIAS  		Italy (09-427) – Agreement for Cooperation on the European Space Agency-Led Planck Mission	  April 27, 2009 
        -    TIAS  		Italy (08-929.1) – Agreement Concerning the Use of the NATO Northern Italian Pipeline System	  September 29, 2008 
        -    TIAS  		Italy (07-1204) – Agreement Concerning Cooperation on the NASA Gamma-Ray Large Area Space Telescope Mission	  December 4, 2007 
        -    TIAS  		Italy (07-1113) – Agreement in the Field of Energy Research and Development	  November 13, 2007 
        -    TIAS  		Italy (07-706) – Agreement Concerning the Dawn Mission	  July 6, 2007 
        -    TIAS  		Italy (06-1106) – Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Mutual Exchange of Military Satellite Communications and Support	  November 6, 2006 
        -    TIAS  		Italy (06-926) – Memorandum of Agreement for Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation Projects	  September 26, 2006 

previous page1…2324252627next page

Back to Top
### EXEA ORNEY 

### GENERAL OF TEXAS

September 10, 1951

Eon. Wm.P, Davis County Auditor Ellis county Warahaohis, Texas Opinion No. V-1272 Re: Legality of using oounty funds to pay **r0r 0ffi013**  **~~ppiie~,** sqUipm6nt and tels- *one faallitiee for

Dear Mr. Davis:

Your request for county HomeDemon* stration Agents 

# ana County Agricultural Agents;

. . an opinion presents for determination the following qussclon:

“Can the County of Ellis legally pay 

### for office supplies and equipment, telephone esrvios and long distanoe tolls for the use of ’ the County Agriaultural Agents ana the County Home Demonstration agents?” Thedeoisions of the Texas courts have repoatadlp held that the commissioners’ court is a oourt of limited jurisdiction and has only such powor‘s as are oonrerred upon it, either by express terms or by necessary lanplioation, by the statutes and Constitution of this State, Chlldress Countat **V.** State, 127

# TAX. 3b3,92

# sew0

2av Pan Rosenberg v. Lovett, 

### 173SOW,508 (Tex. Cib. A 1 

### 15 f ) Roper v. Hall, 280 S.W. 

### 2f;~"(T~x.'C?*&~s i9;5); Art. 2351, V.C.S.; 11 mx. Jur. 632, Countieti, Set, 95.

Article 164, V.C.S,, provides:

“The Cor:missionerPs Court of any bounty of this State is authorized to establish and oonduot oo-operative demonstration work in Agriculture and homeeconomics in oo-operation with the Agricultural andMeohanical College of Tex- upon such teims and conditions .Eon. Wm.P, Davis,. page 2, (V-1272)

as maybe agreed upon by the Commissioners’ Court and the agents of. the f$zic;;ural andkechanical College

; and nay employ such means, andappropriate and expend such sums of moneyas maybe necessary to ofreotively establish and oarry on suoh demonstration work in Agriculture and HomeEconomics in their respective counties .I* This office ha8 held that Article 164 provides authority for the expenditure of county funds for the erection of a building to house the County Agricultural Agent and the HomeDemonstration Agent. Att’y Gen. Op. O-2516 (1940). $6 have also held that the samestatute authorizes the expenditure of county runas for the purchase of kitchen equipment to be usea by the homedemonstration agent. O-620 (1939). Att’y Gen. Op.

In view of the foregoing, it is our opinion’that authority exists for th6 payment of telephone service, office supplies and equipment, and long distance tolls for the offioes or the County Agricultural Agent and the County HomeDemonstration Agent. However, the expenditure of County funds for suah purpose and the necessity thert:,Pore is left to the discretion af the Commissioners’ Court of Ellis County. Att’y f&n. Op. O-620 (1939). SDMJURY TheCommissioners’ Court of Ellis County is authorized to expend county funds in payment ot telephone service, off+ioe supplies and equipment, and long distance tolls for the orfices of County Agricultural Agent and County HomeD6monstration Agent. Theneoessity for these, expenditures is left to the discretion of the Court. APPROVED: Yours very truly, J. C. Davie, Jr. County Aftairs DivisiOn Jesse P. Luton, Jr. Reviewing Assistant Everett Hutohinson Exxeoutive Assistant ;1 PRICEDANIEL Attorney General

BW:Qs:awo
§ 589.317 Foreign person. ( a ) For the purposes of §§ 589.201(a)(6) and 589.413, the term *foreign person* means any citizen or national of a foreign state (including any such individual who is also a citizen or national of the United States), or any entity not organized solely under the laws of the United States or existing solely in the United States, but does not include a foreign state.
( b ) For the purposes of the rest of this part, the term *foreign person* means any person that is not a U.S. person.
CEHR-E

Engineer Pamphlet

690-1-11(10)

Department of the Army

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Washington, DC 20314-1000

EP 690-1-11(10)

1 January 1996

Command-wide Recruitment and 

Outreach Materials

CAREER PROFILE SUPPLEMENT -

CONTRACTING

Distribution Restriction Statement

Approved for public release; distribution is 

unlimited.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Lee Arthur HOUSTON and Leonard “Monk” Sepulvado.

No. 65118.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 17, 1979.

In re Lee Arthur Houston and Leonard “Monk” Sepulvado, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Nos. 26,322, 26,323, 26,324, 26,325. Parish of DeSoto.

Writ Denied. Relator has an adequate remedy by appeal in the event of conviction.
15A NCAC 02D .0410 is proposed for amendment as published in 29:20 NCR 2337 -2338 as follows:

1 2 **15A NCAC 02D .0410 PM2.5 PARTICULATE MA** **TTER** 3 (a) The national primary am bient air quality standards for PM2.5 particulate matter are: 4 (1) 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3), annual arithmetic mean concentration; and 5 (2) 35 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3), 24 -hour average concentration. 6 PM2.5 are 12.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3 ) annual arithmetic mean concentration and 35 μg/m3 24 -hour 7 average Concentration measured in the am bient air as PM2.5 (particles with an aerody namic diameter less than or 8 equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers) by either: 9 (1) A reference method based on appendix L to 40 C . F . R. Part 50 and designated in accordance with 10 40 C . F . R. Part 53 ; or 11 (2) An equivalent method designated in accordance with 40 C . F . R. Part 53 . 12 These standards are attained when the annual arithmetic mean concentration is less than or equal to 15.0 ug/m3 and 13 when the 98th percentile 24 -hour concentration is les s than or equal to 35 ug/m3, as determined according to 14 Appendix N of 40 CFR Part 50. 15 (b) The primary annual PM2.5 standard is met when the annual arithmetic mean concentration, as determined in 16 accordance with appendix N of 40 C . F . R. Part 50 , is less than or equal to 12.0 μg/m3

. 17 (b) For the purpose of determining attainment of the standards in Paragraph (a) of this Rule, particulate matter shall 18 be measured in the ambient air as PM2.5 (particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 19 micrometers) by either: 20 (1) a reference method based on Appendix L of 4 0 CFR Part 50 and designed according to 40 CFR 21 Part 53; or 22 (2) an equivalent method designed according to 40 CFR Part 53. 23 (c) The primary 24 -hour PM2.5 standard is met when the 98 th percentile 24 -hour concentration, as determined in 24 accordance with appendix N of 40 C . F . R. Part 50 , is less than or equal to 35 μg/m3

. 25 26 History Note: Authority G.S. 143 -215.3(a)(1); 143 -215.107(a)(3); 27 Eff. April 1, 1999; 28 Amended Eff. September 1, 2015; January 1, 2010. 29 30