alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 93.413 HHS compliance actions. ( a ) An institution's failure to comply with its assurance and the requirements of this part may result in enforcement action against the institution.
( b ) ORI may address institutional deficiencies through technical assistance if the deficiencies do not substantially affect compliance with this part.
( c ) If an institution fails to comply with its assurance and the requirements of this part, HHS may take some or all of the following compliance actions: ( 1 ) Issue a letter of reprimand.
( 2 ) Direct that research misconduct proceedings be handled by HHS.
( 3 ) Place the institution on special review status.
( 4 ) Place information on the institutional noncompliance on the ORI Web site.
( 5 ) Require the institution to take corrective actions.
( 6 ) Require the institution to adopt and implement an institutional integrity agreement.
( 7 ) Recommend that HHS debar or suspend the entity.
( 8 ) Any other action appropriate to the circumstances.
( d ) If the institution's actions constitute a substantial or recurrent failure to comply with this part, ORI may also revoke the institution's assurance under §§ 93.301 or 93.303.
( e ) ORI may make public any findings of institutional noncompliance and HHS compliance actions.
II 

Calendar No. 308 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2025 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 15, 2007 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AUGUST 1, 2007 

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 11033 South State Street in Chicago, Illinois, 

as the ‘‘Willye B. White Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. WILLYE B. WHITE POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 11033 South State Street in Chi6 cago, Illinois, shall be known and designated as the 

7 ‘‘Willye B. White Post Office Building’’. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2025 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Willye B. White Post 

5 Office Building’’. 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS

bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
Calendar No. 308 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2025 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostOffice Building’’. Chicago, Illinois, as the ‘‘Willye B. White Post al Service located at 11033 South State Street in 

AUGUST 1, 2007 

Reported without amendment 


bajohnson on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
#### BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES.

[56 C. Cls. 279; 260 U.S. 565.]

Judgment was rendered in favor of the United States in the court below. On appeal the judgment was *affirmed*and the Supreme Court decided:

An action to recover money paid as stamp taxes under tlie act of May 12, 1900, as amended June 30, 1902, can not be maintained if no claim for redemption or allowance was made to tbe Commissioner of Internal Revenue witbin tbe two-year period prescribed by the act.

A request to the comissioner for an informal ruling on tbe taxability of particular deeds, after which stamps were affixed in accordance with the ruling and without protest, *held*not a claim for abatement or refund.

Mr. Justice Sutherland

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court January 2, 1923.
****

This chart presents 1997 Washington exports to the Newly IndependentStates of the former Soviet Union.  Data used to create the chart werecollected by the Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce,with further analysis by the University of Massachusetts,Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research (MISER). Formore information call BISNIS at (202) 482-4655 or visit the MISER websiteat www.umass.edu/miser.
'96 export data for Washington
'95 export data for Washington
Return to USA Export Map
Return to BISNIS Home Page
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

April 21 , 2017 

# Order

Clerk April 2 1 , 2017

15 5 457 ( 5 8 )

ALLAN ROOKS

, Plaintiff,

SC: 15 5 457

v COA: 3 2 8561

Macomb CC : 1 3

- 0 0 1697

- N O

ANDOVER HEIGHTS CONDOMINIUM

ASSOCIATION,

Defendant/Third

- Party Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v

JOHNNIES CONCRETE REPLACEMENT, INC

. , Third

- Party Defendant

- Appellee.

__________________________________________ /

On order of the C hief Justice , the motion of third

- party defendant

- appellee to

extend the time for filing i t s answer to the application for leave to appeal is GRANTED.

The answer will be accepted as timely filed if submitted on or before May 10 , 2017.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Glen Raymond HATHAWAY v. Hayden J. DEES, Warden, Dixon Correctional Institute.

No. 67646.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 6, 1980.

In re Glen Raymond Hathaway applying for writ of certiorari. Parish of St. Mary. No. 108-240.

Writ denied.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2192/2004

of 20 December 2004         

fixing the corrective amount applicable to the refund on cereals

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 15(2) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The corrective amount referred to in Article 1(1)(a), (b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 which is applicable to export refunds fixed in advance except for malt shall be as set out in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 1 January 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 20 December 2004.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

(2)OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1431/2003 (OJ L 203, 12.8.2003, p. 16).

----

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 20 December 2004 fixing the corrective amount applicable to the refund on cereals

----
§ 52h.6 Availability of information. ( a ) Transcripts, minutes, and other documents made available to or prepared for or by a peer review group will be available for public inspection and copying to the extent provided by the Freedom of Information Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552), the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. appendix 2), the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a), and implementing DHHS regulations (45 CFR parts 5, 5b).
( b ) Meetings of peer review groups reviewing grant applications or contract proposals are closed to the public in accordance with sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6)) and section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. appendix 2). Documents made available to, or prepared for or by peer review groups that contain trade secrets or commercial or financial information obtained from a person that is privileged or confidential, and personal information concerning individuals associated with applications or proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, are exempt from disclosure in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4) and 552(b)(6)).
( c ) Meetings of peer review groups reviewing contract project concepts are open to the public in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. appendix 2) and the Government in the Sunshine Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552b).
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 187 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 187

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 8, 2007

 Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse and 
 customhouse located at 515 West First Street in Duluth, Minnesota, as 
 the ``Gerald W. Heaney Federal Building and United States Courthouse 
                           and Customhouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building and United States courthouse and customhouse 
located at 515 West First Street in Duluth, Minnesota, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Gerald W. Heaney Federal Building and United 
States Courthouse and Customhouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building and United States 
courthouse and customhouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to 
be a reference to the ``Gerald W. Heaney Federal Building and United 
States Courthouse and Customhouse''.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 7, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
§ 62.57 How will States be selected to participate in this program? Within the limits of funds available under section 338H of the Act, the Secretary may award grants to State applicants whose proposed Loan Repayment Programs will, in his or her judgment, best promote the purposes of section 338H of the Act, taking into account, among other pertinent factors: ( a ) The need of the State for health professions manpower;
( b ) The number and type of providers the State proposes to support through this program;
( c ) The acceptableness of the State's standards for the designation of medically underserved areas and the appropriateness of the proposed placements of obligated providers;
( d ) The degree of similarity between the proposed State Loan Repayment Program and the National Health Service Corps Loan Repayment Program;
( e ) The adequacy of the qualifications, the administrative and managerial ability and the experience of the State staff to administer and carry out the proposed project;
( f ) The suitability of the applicant's approach and the degree to which the applicant's project is coordinated with Federal, State and other organized activities for meeting the State's health professions manpower needs and resources, including mechanisms for an ongoing evaluation of the program's activities;
( g ) The source and plans for use of the State match (including the percentage of the State's match that is proposed to be used for loan repayments), the degree to which the State match exceeds 25% or has increased over time, and the amount of the match relative to the needs and resources of the States; and
( h ) The extent to which special consideration will be extended to medically underserved areas with large minority populations.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-30033 Summary Calendar

JOHN WILLIAM MORACE, Petitioner-Appellant,

versus BURL CAIN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, Respondent-Appellee.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 98-CV-443

-------------------- August 20, 1999 Before KING, Chief Judge, and HIGGINBOTHAM and CARL E. STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * John William Morace, Louisiana prisoner No. 114169, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition asserting a claim of an excessive sentence as a result of being sentenced as a second felony offender. The district court dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies. In granting Morace a certificate of appealability (COA), the district court stated that the issue of whether Morace hadNo. 99-30033 -2- exhausted his state court remedies was a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Exhaustion, however, is not a constitutional issue. See Sonnier v. Johnson , 161 F.3d 941, 943 (5th Cir. 1998). Therefore, we will treat this COA as one granted due to a “credible showing of exhaustion.” See Whitehead v. Johnson , 157 F.3d 384, 386 (5th Cir. 1998) (citing Murphy v. Johnson , 110 F.3d 10, 11 (5th Cir. 1997) (applying the COA standard to nonconstitutional issue of exhaustion of state. remedies). A petitioner seeking habeas relief under § 2254 is required to exhaust all claims in state court prior to requesting federal collateral relief. See id . at 387. Here, the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeals refused to consider Morace’s excessive sentence claim in a post-conviction proceeding and advised Morace to seek and out-of-time appeal instead. The Louisiana Supreme Court summarily denied Morace’s writ of certiorari. Thus, there was no adjudication on the merits of Morace’s sentencing claim due to the procedural defect in his petition. A claim is not exhausted unless the habeas petitioner provides the highest state court with a “fair opportunity to pass upon the claim.” Mercadel v. Cain , 1999 WL 409655, *4 (5th Cir. June 21, 1999) (per curiam) (citing Dupuy v. Butler , 837 F.2d 699, 702 (5th Cir. 1988)). This “fair opportunity” requires that the applicant “present his claims before the state courts in a procedurally proper manner according to the rules of the state

court.” Id . Although Morace arguably presented his sentencing claim to the Louisiana Supreme Court, the Louisiana Supreme CourtNo. 99-30033 -3- was denied a fair opportunity to consider Morace’s claim because Morace has not yet filed an out-of-time appeal; his claim therefore remains unexhausted. See id . Accordingly, the district court’s dismissal without prejudice is AFFIRMED.
§ 93.509 Computation of time. ( a ) In computing any period of time under this part for filing and service or for responding to an order issued by the ALJ, the computation begins with the day following the act or event, and includes the last day of the period unless that day is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday observed by the Federal government, in which case it includes the next business day.
( b ) When the period of time allowed is less than 7 days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays observed by the Federal government must be excluded from the computation.
( c ) Where a document has been filed by placing it in the mail, an additional 5 days must be added to the time permitted for any response. This paragraph does not apply to a respondent's request for hearing under § 93.501.
( d ) Except for the respondent's request for a hearing, the ALJ may modify the time for the filing of any document or paper required or authorized under the rules in this part to be filed for good cause shown. When time permits, notice of a party's request for extension of the time and an opportunity to respond must be provided to the other party.
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*JOSEPH GAYMON

*H. Jeffrey Beck,*in support of the petition.

*Michele C. Lukban,*deputy assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided April 24, 1997

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 44 Conn. App. 916 (AC 15340), is denied.
<PAGE>





EXHIBIT 99.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of
Peoples Educational Holdings, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:  November 11, 2002                    /s/ Brian Beckwith
                                            ------------------------------------

                                            Brian T. Beckwith,
                                            Chief Executive Officer
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Promoting Accountability for Corruption that Fuels South Sudan’s Conflict

# 									Promoting Accountability for Corruption that Fuels South Sudan’s Conflict							

Press Statement

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

March 13, 2024

Nearly thirteen years after declaring its independence, South Sudan remains a precariously fragile state beset by insecurity and poverty.  The nation’s leaders continually fail to exhibit the political will necessary to create the conditions for sustainable peace, democratic governance, the rule of law, and prosperity for the South Sudanese people.  They have yet to demonstrate the political will to establish an environment conducive to free and fair elections taking place, as scheduled, in December 2024.  Leaders of all parties share responsibility for this failure and for the elite capture of the nation’s riches, at the expense of the country’s peace and the general wellbeing.  Widespread corruption perpetuates the suffering and, directly and indirectly, supports conflict, thereby undermining the progress South Sudanese envisioned when they declared statehood.  The United States remains committed to supporting the South Sudanese peoples’ long unmet expectations for peace, democracy, human rights, and a government that uses public resources for the common good.

Today, we are announcing steps to impose visa restrictions on multiple individuals in South Sudan for undermining or impeding a sustainable peace by engaging in corruption that fuels conflict in South Sudan.

Under Section 212(a)(3)C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, these individuals will be generally ineligible for visas to the United States.  Certain family members of such persons may also be subject to these restrictions.

These visa restrictions are specific to certain individuals and are not directed at the South Sudanese people or the Government of South Sudan.  The decision to pursue visa restrictions reflects the commitment of the United States to support South Sudanese aspirations to combat corruption, strengthen democracy and the rule of law, and live in peace.

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsConflictsCorruptionOffice of the SpokespersonPeaceSouth SudanVisas

Back to Top
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 291/2005

of 21 February 2005         

fixing the A1 and B export refunds for fruit and vegetables (tomatoes, oranges, lemons and apples)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 35(3),

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   For system A1, the refund rates, the refund application period and the scheduled quantities for the products concerned are fixed in the Annex hereto. For system B, the indicative refund rates, the licence application period and the scheduled quantities for the products concerned are fixed in the Annex hereto.

2.   The licences issued in respect of food aid as referred to in Article 16 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1291/2000 (4) shall not count against the eligible quantities in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 9 March 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 21 February 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 47/2003 (OJ L 7, 11.1.2003, p. 64).

(2)OJ L 268, 9.10.2001, p. 8. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1176/2002 (OJ L 170, 29.6.2002, p. 69).

(3)OJ L 366, 24.12.1987, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2180/2003 (OJ L 335, 22.12.2003, p. 1).

(4)OJ L 152, 24.6.2000, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 636/2004 (OJ L 100, 6.4.2004, p. 25).

----

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 21 February 2005 fixing the export refunds on fruit and vegetables (tomatoes, oranges, lemons and apples)

----

(1)  The product codes are set out in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 (OJ L 366, 24.12.1987, p. 1).

(2)  The ‘            A            ’ series destination codes are set out in Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87.

The numeric destination codes are set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2081/2003 (OJ L 313, 28.11.2003, p. 11).

The other destinations are defined as follows:

----
§ 488.820 Available sanctions. In addition to termination of the provider agreement, the following alternative sanctions are available: ( a ) Civil money penalties.
( b ) Suspension of payment for all new admissions.
( c ) Temporary management of the HHA.
( d ) Directed plan of correction, as set out at § 488.850.
( e ) Directed in-service training, as set out at § 488.855.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2013 

To provide a technical correction to the Federal preemption of State or 

local laws concerning the markings and identification of imitation or 

toy firearms entering into interstate commerce. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 24, 2007 

Mrs. BLACKBURN (for herself, Mr. GORDON of Tennessee, Mr. LINCOLN

DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. DAVID DAVIS of Tennessee, and Mr. GONZALEZ) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To provide a technical correction to the Federal preemption 

of State or local laws concerning the markings and identification of imitation or toy firearms entering into interstate commerce. 

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 ‘‘Toy Gun Marking Im5 provement Act’’. 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•HR 2013 IH

1 SEC. 2. PREEMPTION OF STATE OR LOCAL LAWS CON2 CERNING THE MARKINGS AND IDENTIFICA3 TION OF IMITATION OR TOY FIREARMS. 

4 Section 4(g) of the Federal Energy Management Im5 provement Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C. 5001(g)) is amended 

6 by striking ‘‘which provide for markings’’ and all that fol7 lows through ‘‘firearm developed prior to 1898; or’’ and 

8 inserting the following: ‘‘relating to markings, identifica9 tion, or sale of toy, look-alike, and imitation firearms. No 

10 State or local subdivision shall— 

11 ‘‘(1) prohibit the sale or manufacture of any 

12 look-alike, nonfiring, toy or collector replica of an 

13 antique firearm developed prior to 1898; or’’. 

Æ 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS