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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2764 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2764

 To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize veterans who are 
  totally disabled as the result of a service-connected disability to 
 travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent 
as retired members of the Armed Forces are authorized to travel on such 
                               aircraft.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 12, 1995

Mr. Weldon of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on National Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize veterans who are 
  totally disabled as the result of a service-connected disability to 
 travel on military aircraft in the same manner and to the same extent 
as retired members of the Armed Forces are authorized to travel on such 
                               aircraft.

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

SECTION 1. TRAVEL OF DISABLED VETERANS ON MILITARY AIRCRAFT.

    (a) Authority.--Chapter 157 of title 10, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting after section 2641 the following:
``Sec. 2641a. Travel of disabled veterans on military aircraft
    ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense shall allow veterans 
who are authorized under laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs to receive compensation for a service-connected disability 
rated total in degree under section 1155 of title 38, United States 
Code, to travel on unscheduled military flights within the continental 
United States and on scheduled overseas flights operated by the Air 
Mobility Command in the same manner and to the same extent as retired 
members of the armed forces are authorized by regulation to so travel.
    ``(b) Definitions.--In this section, the terms `veteran', 
`compensation', and `service-connected' have the meanings given such 
terms in section 101 of title 38, United States Code.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of 
such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
2641 the following:

                              ``2641a. Travel of disabled veterans on 
                                        military aircraft.''.
                                 <all>
```
HomeVenezuela

# Venezuela

160 items

        -    Press Statement  		Venezuela National Day	  Antony J. BlinkenJuly 5, 2023 
        -    Press Statement  		Venezuela and Electoral Decisions	  Matthew MillerJune 30, 2023 
        -    Bilateral Relations Fact Sheet  		U.S. Relations With Venezuela	  June 27, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – June 15, 2023	  Matthew MillerJune 15, 2023 
        -    Report  		2023 Trafficking in Persons Report: Venezuela	  June 15, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – June 14, 2023	  Matthew MillerJune 14, 2023 
        -    Readout  		Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Brazilian Secretary General da Rocha	  May 15, 2023 
        -    Report  		2022 Report on International Religious Freedom: Venezuela	  May 15, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – May 3, 2023	  Vedant PatelMay 3, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – April 25, 2023	  Vedant PatelApril 25, 2023 

previous page123456…16next page

Back to Top
#### § 110.84 The Secretary's right to recover benefits paid under this Program from third-party payers.

Upon payment of benefits under this Program, the Secretary will be subrogated to the rights of the requester and may assert a claim against any third-party payer with a legal or contractual obligation to pay for (or provide) such benefits and may recover from such third-party payer(s) the amount of benefits paid up to the amount of benefits the third-party payer has or had an obligation to pay for (or provide). In other words, the Secretary may pay benefits before the requester receives a payment from a third-party payer in certain circumstances. In those circumstances, the Secretary has a right to be reimbursed by the third-party payer. The circumstances in which the Secretary may assert this right include those in which the Secretary pays benefits under this Program to a requester before a final decision is made that a third-party payer has an obligation to pay such benefits to the requester. Requesters receiving benefits under this Program (or their representatives) shall assist the Secretary in recovering such benefits. In the event that a requester receives a benefit from a third-party payer after receiving the same type of benefits from the Secretary under this Program, the Secretary has a right to recover from the requester the amount of the benefit(s) received. The requester must notify and reimburse the Program within ten business days of receiving the third-party payment(s).
- Office Home
- About Us
- Leadership
- Fellowships
- Contact Us

HomeBureaus & Offices > Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment...Office of the Science and Technology Adviser

# Office of the Science and Technology Adviser

## 				Our Mission			

					Our mission is to anticipate the foreign policy impacts of scientific research, discoveries, development, and innovations; build science, technology, and innovation (STI) capacity within the diplomatic corps; and connect domestic and international STI enterprises to promote U.S. priorities.				

Science and Technology Adviser to the Secretary of State

Dr. Patricia Gruber

							Follow Us:																			TwitterFlickr

Back to Top
#### § 136a.53 General rule.

Federal funds may not be used to pay for or otherwise provide for abortions in the programs described in § 36a.51, except under the Circumstances discribed in § 36a.54.

[47 FR 4018, Jan. 27, 1982, as amended at 65 FR 53914, Sept. 6, 2000]
# C_2005171EN.01003502.xml

| 9.7.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/35

---

Removal from the Register of Case T-441/03 (1)

1

(2005/C 171/58)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

By order of 28 April 2005, the President of the Fourth Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the Register of Case T-441/03, N.V. Firma Léon Van Parys and Others v Commission of the European Communities.

---

(1)  OJ C 59 of 6.3.2004.

1

---
# Latvia

108 items

        -    Report  		Latvia	  March 3, 2017 
        -    TIAS  		Latvia (15-715.1) – Defense Agreement on Cooperation	  July 15, 2015 
        -    TIAS  		Latvia (14-1215) – Agreement to Improve International Tax Compliance and to Implement the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act	  December 15, 2014 
        -    TIAS  		Latvia (10-720.1) – Agreement on Enhancing Cooperation in Preventing and Combating Serious Crime	  July 20, 2010 
        -    TIAS  		Latvia (10-201.37) – Protocol to the Treaty of June 13, 1997 on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters	  February 1, 2010 
        -    TIAS  		Latvia (09-415) – Treaty on Extradition	  April 15, 2009 
        -    TIAS  		Latvia (07-1203) – Agreement for Cooperation in the Prevention of Illicit Trafficking in Nuclear and Other Radioactive Material	  December 3, 2007 
        -    TIAS  		Latvia (06-829) – Agreement Concerning the Status of the Private Educational Institution, “The International School of Latvia”	  August 29, 2006 
        -    TIAS  		Latvia (05-425.1) – Agreement Concerning Cooperation in the Area of Countering the Proliferation of Nuclear Materials and Technologies	  April 25, 2005 
        -    TIAS  		Latvia (04-1112) – Agreement on the Protection and Preservation of Certain Cultural Properties	  November 12, 2004 

previous page1…891011next page

Back to Top
§ 1005.16 Witnesses. ( a ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, testimony at the hearing will be given orally by witnesses under oath or affirmation.
( b ) At the discretion of the ALJ, testimony (other than expert testimony) may be admitted in the form of a written statement. The ALJ may, at his or her discretion, admit prior sworn testimony of experts which has been subject to adverse examination, such as a deposition or trial testimony. Any such written statement must be provided to all other parties along with the last known address of such witnesses, in a manner that allows sufficient time for other parties to subpoena such witness for cross-examination at the hearing. Prior written statements of witnesses proposed to testify at the hearing will be exchanged as provided in § 1005.8.
( c ) The ALJ will exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to: ( 1 ) Make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth,
( 2 ) Avoid repetition or needless consumption of time, and
( 3 ) Protect witnesses from harassment or undue embarrassment.
( d ) The ALJ will permit the parties to conduct such cross-examination of witnesses as may be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts.
( e ) The ALJ may order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses. This does not authorize exclusion of— ( 1 ) A party who is an individual;
( 2 ) In the case of a party that is not an individual, an officer or employee of the party appearing for the entity pro se or designated as the party's representative; or
( 3 ) An individual whose presence is shown by a party to be essential to the presentation of its case, including an individual engaged in assisting the attorney for the IG.
[57 FR 3350, Jan. 29, 1992, as amended at 67 FR 11936, Mar. 18, 2002]
§ 800.224 Foreign person. ( a ) The term *foreign person* means: ( 1 ) Any foreign national, foreign government, or foreign entity; or
( 2 ) Any entity over which control is exercised or exercisable by a foreign national, foreign government, or foreign entity.
( b ) Any entity over which control is exercised or exercisable by a foreign person is a foreign person.
( c ) Examples: ( 1 ) *Example 1.* Corporation A is organized under the laws of a foreign state and is engaged in business only outside the United States. All of its shares are held by Corporation X, which solely controls Corporation A. Corporation X is organized in the United States and is wholly owned and controlled by U.S. nationals. Assuming no other relevant facts, Corporation A, although organized and operating only outside the United States, is not a foreign entity due to § 800.220(b) and is not a foreign person.
( 2 ) *Example 2.* Same facts as the first sentence of the example in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The government of the foreign state under whose laws Corporation A is organized exercises control over Corporation A because a law establishing Corporation A gives the foreign state the right to appoint Corporation A's board members. Corporation A is a foreign person.
( 3 ) *Example 3.* Corporation A is organized in the United States, is engaged in interstate commerce in the United States, and is controlled by Corporation X. Corporation X is organized under the laws of a foreign state, its principal place of business is located outside the United States, and 50 percent of its shares are held by foreign nationals and 50 percent of its shares are held by U.S. nationals. Both Corporation A and Corporation X are foreign persons. Corporation A is also a U.S. business.
( 4 ) *Example 4.* Corporation A is organized under the laws of a foreign state and is owned and controlled by a foreign national. A branch of Corporation A engages in interstate commerce in the United States. Corporation A (including its branch) is a foreign person. The branch is also a U.S. business.
( 5 ) *Example 5.* Corporation A is organized under the laws of a foreign state and its principal place of business is located outside the United States. Forty-five percent of the equity interest in Corporation A is owned in equal shares by numerous unrelated foreign investors, none of whom has control. The foreign investors have no formal or informal arrangement with any other holder of equity interest in Corporation A to act in concert regarding Corporation A. Corporation A can demonstrate that the remainder of the equity interest in Corporation A is ultimately held by U.S. nationals. Assuming no other relevant facts, Corporation A is not a foreign entity or foreign person.
( 6 ) *Example 6.* Same facts as the example in paragraph (c)(5) of this section, except that one of the foreign investors, a foreign national, controls Corporation A. Assuming no other relevant facts, Corporation A is not a foreign entity due to § 800.220(b), but it is a foreign person under paragraph (a)(2) of this section because it is controlled by a foreign national.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2982 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                               H. R. 2982

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

   To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey the Carbon Hill 
            National Fish Hatchery to the State of Alabama.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2982

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey the Carbon Hill 
            National Fish Hatchery to the State of Alabama.

    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 ``Carbon Hill National Fish Hatchery 
Conveyance Act''.

SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF CARBON HILL NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY TO THE STATE 
              OF ALABAMA.

    (a) Conveyance Requirement.--Within 180 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall convey to 
the State of Alabama without reimbursement, all right, title, and 
interest of the United States in and to the property described in 
subsection (b), for use by the Game and Fish Division of the Alabama 
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, as part of the State 
of Alabama fish culture program.
    (b) Property Described.--The property referred to in subsection (a) 
is the property known as the Carbon Hill National Fish Hatchery, 
located on County Road 63 at Carbon Hill, Alabama, in Walker County, 
Alabama, consisting of 67 acres (more or less), and all improvements 
and related personal property under the control of the Secretary that 
is located on that property, including buildings, structures, 
equipment, and all easements, leases, and water rights relating to that 
property.
    (c) Use and Reversionary Interest.--The property conveyed to the 
State of Alabama pursuant to this section shall be used by the State 
for purposes of fishery resources management and fisheries-related 
activities, and if it is used for any other purpose detrimental to 
those purposes and activities, all right, title, and interest in and to 
all property conveyed pursuant to this section shall revert to the 
United States. The State of Alabama shall ensure that the property 
reverting to the United States is in substantially the same or better 
condition as at the time of transfer.

            Passed the House of Representatives May 14, 1996.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
§ 82.3 Definitions. ( a ) *5-cent coin of the United States* means a 5-cent coin minted and issued by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5112(a)(5).
( b ) *One-cent coin of the United States* means a one-cent coin minted and issued by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 5112(a)(6).
( c ) *Export* means to remove, send, ship, or carry, or to take any action with the intent to facilitate a person's removing, sending, shipping, or carrying, from the United States or any place subject to the jurisdiction thereof, to any place outside of the United States or to any place not subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
( d ) *Person* means any individual, partnership, association, corporation, or other organization, but does not include an agency of the Government of the United States.
( e ) Treat or treatment means to smelt, refine, or otherwise treat by heating, or by a chemical, electrical, or mechanical process.
#### FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, DIVISION OF ECONOMICAL DEVELOPMENT, Petitioner, v. Sally RAMSEY and Career Service Commission, Respondents.

No. II-260.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 10, 1979.

Rehearing Denied July 20, 1979.

Kenneth H. Hart, Jr., Tallahassee, for petitioner.

Clinton H. Coulter, Jr., Tallahassee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

We have considered the respondents’ motions for attorney’s fees on appeal and for interest. The motions are hereby DENIED.

MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
#### § 6.16 Judicial review.

Judicial review of final agency decisions on awards may be sought as provided in 5 U.S.C. 504(c)(2).
§ 589.502 Effect of license or other authorization. ( a ) No license or other authorization contained in this part, or otherwise issued by OFAC, authorizes or validates any transaction effected prior to the issuance of such license or other authorization, unless specifically provided in such license or authorization.
( b ) No regulation, ruling, instruction, or license authorizes any transaction prohibited under this part unless the regulation, ruling, instruction, or license is issued by OFAC and specifically refers to this part. No regulation, ruling, instruction, or license referring to this part shall be deemed to authorize any transaction prohibited by any other part of this chapter unless the regulation, ruling, instruction, or license specifically refers to such part.
( c ) Any regulation, ruling, instruction, or license authorizing any transaction prohibited under this part has the effect of removing a prohibition contained in this part from the transaction, but only to the extent specifically stated by its terms. Unless the regulation, ruling, instruction, or license otherwise specifies, such an authorization does not create any right, duty, obligation, claim, or interest in, or with respect to, any property that would not otherwise exist under ordinary principles of law.
( d ) Nothing contained in this part shall be construed to supersede the requirements established under any other provision of law or to relieve a person from any requirement to obtain a license or other authorization from another department or agency of the U.S. Government in compliance with applicable laws and regulations subject to the jurisdiction of that department or agency. For example, exports of goods, services, or technical data that are not prohibited by this part or that do not require a license by OFAC nevertheless may require authorization by the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Department of State, or other agencies of the U.S. Government.
( e ) 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.
( f ) Any payment relating to a transaction authorized in or pursuant to this part that is routed through the U.S. financial system should reference the relevant OFAC general or specific license authorizing the payment to avoid the blocking or rejection of the transfer.
40656.

#### JONES v. ABRAHAM et al.

Decided April 24, 1964.

*623*Leiter*<fe *Leiter, Marvin O’Neal, Jr., Robert Paul Leiter,*for plaintiff in error.

*Gambrell, Harlan, Russell, Moye & Richardson, Edward W. Killorin, Donald O. Clark, John W. Maloof,*contra.

Eberhardt, Judge.

The question at issue here must be resolved by an interpretation of the option to lease along with its various amendments. It is well settled that unambiguous contracts are for the court to construe and a motion for summary judgment is a proper method of invoking the court’s determination. *General Gas Corp. v. Carn,*103 Ga. App. 542 (120 SE2d 156). In the trial court, both parties took the position that the agreements comprising the total contract were unambiguous and both requested a summary judgment in their favor. Now plaintiff insists that there were various ambiguities that should have been passed on by a jury.

We think the parties were right in the lower court and the agreements are not ambiguous. The key is found in the amendment1 of November 29, 1962, executed by Paul Jones and Alpha Investment. This amendment clearly shows that the defendant’s rights under the option agreement had been transferred to Alpha, that the lease was with Alpha, although defendants were to remain liable, and that the rental was to be $10,000 per year for the first ten years. In addition to these factors, the amendment in direct terms provides that *“Except as herein specified*the terms of [the April 26, 1962, option] . . . *624shall govern and be effective.” (Emphasis added). This language shows a clear intent by the parties to change the rental from $18,000 to $10,000 per year.

In their affidavit supporting a motion for summary judgment, defendants explained that Alpha Investment was a corporation formed by them to be a party to the lease and that this was the reason they agreed to continue to be liable. This is a common business practice. Additionally, they set forth that the assignment of their lease interest February 21, 1963, was to accommodate the title company by a formal showing of the previous transfer from defendants to Alpha.

Plaintiff in his affidavit and deposition, insisted that he was “abiding by,” “relying on,” and “going by” the papers as they stood and did not offer additional evidence. Had plaintiff desired to produce additional matter “the time for a party opposing the motion to present relevant evidence or show satisfactory reasons for the nonproduction is at the time of the hearing on the order to show cause, and if this is not done, it is too late to complain later. *King v. Fryer,*107 Ga. App. 715 (131 SE2d 203); *Scales v. Peevy,*103 Ga. App. 42 (2) (118 SE2d 193); *Studstill v. Aetna Cas. &c. Co.,*101 Ga. App. 766, 768 (115 SE2d 374).” *Planters Rural Tel. Co-op., Inc. v. Chance,*108 Ga. App. 146, 148 (132 SE2d 90).

The summary judgment was properly granted for the defendants.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., and Jordan, J., concur.*

1

Though designated as an amendment to the option agreement, it sets out the terms of the lease and appears to be the lease agreement.