alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 83.11 What happens to petitions that do not satisfy all relevant requirements under §§ 83.7 through 83.9? ( a ) NIOSH will notify the petitioner(s) of any requirement that is not met by the petition, assist the petitioner(s) with guidance in developing relevant information, and provide 30 calendar days for the petitioner(s) to revise the petition accordingly.
( b ) After 30 calendar days from the date of notification under paragraph (a) of this section, NIOSH will notify any petitioner(s) whose petition remains unsatisfactory of the proposed finding of NIOSH that the petition fails to meet the specified requirements and the basis for this finding.
( c ) A petitioner may request in writing a review of a proposed finding within 30 calendar days of notification under paragraph (b) of this section. Petitioners must specify why the proposed finding should be reversed, based on the petition requirements and on the information that the petitioners had already submitted. The request may not include any new information or documentation that was not included in the completed petition. If the petitioner obtains new information within this 30-day period, the petitioner should provide it to NIOSH. NIOSH will consider this new information as a revision of the petition under paragraph (a) of this section.
( d ) Three HHS personnel, appointed by the Director of NIOSH, who were not involved in developing the proposed finding will complete reviews within 30 work days of the request for such a review. The Director of NIOSH will consider the results of the review and then make a final decision as to whether the petition satisfies the requirements for a petition.
( e ) Proposed findings established by NIOSH under paragraph (b) of this section will become final decisions in 31 calendar days if not reviewed under paragraph (d) of this section.
( f ) Based on new information, NIOSH may, at its discretion, reconsider a decision that a petition does not satisfy the requirements for a petition.
( g ) A petitioner whose petition has been found not to satisfy the requirements for a petition under either paragraph (d) or (e) of this section may submit to NIOSH a new petition for the identical class of employees at any time thereafter on the basis of new information not provided to NIOSH in the original petition. In such a case, the petitioner is required to fully re-address all the requirements of §§ 83.7-83.9 in the petition.
[70 FR 75952, Dec. 22, 2005, as amended at 72 FR 37459, July 10, 2007]
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Repatriation of U.S., Canadian, Dutch and Finnish Citizens from Northeast Syria

# 									Repatriation of U.S., Canadian, Dutch and Finnish Citizens from Northeast Syria							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

May 7, 2024

Today the United States repatriated 11 U.S. citizens from northeast Syria, including five minors.  Additionally, we resettled in the United States the nine-year-old non-U.S. citizen sibling of one of the U.S. citizen minors.  This is the largest single repatriation of U.S. citizens from northeast Syria to date.

In conducting this complex repatriation and resettlement the Department coordinated closely with our interagency partners.  I would like to thank the Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service, and the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Health and Human Services for their assistance.

Approximately 30,000 individuals from more than 60 countries outside Syria remain in the al-Hol and Roj displaced persons camps, the majority of whom are children.  As governments undertake repatriation of their nationals, we urge thoughtfulness and flexibility to ensure that to the maximum extent possible family units remain intact.

The only durable solution to the humanitarian and security crisis in the displaced persons camps and detention facilities in northeast Syria is for countries to repatriate, rehabilitate, reintegrate, and where appropriate, ensure accountability for wrongdoing.  The United States remains committed to helping those nations which seek to repatriate their nationals from northeast Syria, and to finding solutions, including resettlement, for those who are unable to return to their communities or countries of origin.

As a part of this operation the United States also facilitated the repatriation of six Canadian citizens, four Dutch citizens, and one Finnish citizen, among them eight children.  We thank these governments for their partnership and applaud their demonstration of leadership by bringing their nationals home.  We thank the Government of Kuwait for its support, and also the Syrian Democratic Forces for its assistance.

Tags

Bureau of CounterterrorismBureau of Near Eastern AffairsCanadaOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of StateSyria

Back to Top
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Notes:

1. In Patent and Trademark Office publications and usage the part number is omitted from the numbers of §§ 1.1 to 1.352 and the numbers to the right of the decimal point correspond with the respective rule numbers.

2. For nomenclature changes to part 1, see 68 FR 14335, Mar. 25, 2003; 87 FR 68904, Nov. 17, 2022.

#### § 1.184 [Reserved]

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.
#### Chicago, Indianapolis *&*Louisville Railway Company *v.*Town of Salem.

[No. 20,658.

Filed February 15, 1906.]

From Washington Circuit Court; *T. B. Buskirk,*Judge.

Action by the Town of Salem against the Chicago, Indianapolis *&*Louisville Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

*Reversed.*

*704*E. C. Field*and *H. R. Kurrie,*for appellant.

*Mitchell & Mitchell,*for appellee.

Montgomery, J.

—The questions involved in this appeal are the same as those decided in *Chicago, etc., R. Co.*v. *Town of Salem*(1906), *ante,*71, and upon the authority of that case the judgment in this must be reversed.

The judgment is reversed, with directions to sustain appellant’s demurrer to the complaint.
§ 51c.107 Use of project funds. ( a ) Any funds granted pursuant to this part, as well as other funds to be used in performance of the approved project, may be expended solely for carrying out the approved project in accordance with section 330 of the Act, the applicable regulations of this part, the terms and conditions of the award, and the applicable cost principles prescribed in 45 CFR part 75, subpart E.
( b ) Project funds awarded under this part may be used for, but need not be limited to, the following: ( 1 ) The costs of acquiring and modernizing existing buildings (including the costs of amortizing the principal of, and paying interest on, loans), but only in accordance with subpart E of this part and as approved in the grant award;
( 2 ) The costs of obtaining technical assistance to develop and improve the management capability of the project, but only as approved by the Secretary;
( 3 ) The reimbursement of members of the grantee's governing board, if any, for reasonable expenses actually incurred by reason of their participation in board activities;
( 4 ) The reimbursement of governing board members for wages lost by reason of participation in the activities of such board if the member is from a family with an annual family income below $10,000 or if the member is a single person with an annual income below $7,000;
( 5 ) The cost of delivering health services, including services rendered on a prepaid capitation basis, to residents of the project's catchment area within the following limitations: grant funds may be used to pay the full cost of project services to individuals and families with annual incomes at or below those set forth in the poverty guidelines updated periodically in the Federal Register by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under the authority of 42 U.S.C. 9902(2); and to pay the portion of the cost of services provided in accordance with the schedule of discounts which, under such schedule, is uncompensated; *Provided,* That ( i ) charges will be made to such individuals and families in accordance with § 51c.303(f) of subpart C;
( ii ) reasonable effort shall be made to collect such charges under a billing and collections system; and
( iii ) the charge to grant funds shall exclude any amounts collected pursuant to paragraph (b)(5)(ii) of this section;
( 6 ) The cost of insurance for medical emergency and out-of-area coverage;
( 7 ) The cost of providing to the staff of the project training related to the provision of health services provided or to be provided by the project, and, to the staff and governing board, if any, training related to the management of an ambulatory care facility, consistent with the applicable requirements of 45 CFR part 75; and
( 8 ) The cost of developing and maintaining a reserve fund where required by State law for prepaid health care plans.
( c ) Prior approval by the Secretary of revisions of the budget and project plan is required whenever there is to be a significant change in the scope or nature of project activities.
[41 FR 53205, Dec. 3, 1976, as amended at 81 FR 3007, Jan. 20, 2016; 85 FR 72908, Nov. 16, 2020]
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of Appeals3046305-MAY-201108:49 AM
§ 70.15 Mandatory reassessment of a Federal order for quarantine, isolation, or conditional release. ( a ) The Director (excluding the CDC official who issued the quarantine, isolation, or conditional release order) shall reassess the need to continue the quarantine, isolation, or conditional release of an individual no later than 72 hours after the service of the Federal order.
( b ) As part of the reassessment, the Director (excluding the CDC official who issued the quarantine, isolation, or conditional release order) shall review all records considered in issuing the Federal order, including travel records, records evidencing exposure or infection with a quarantinable communicable disease, as well as any relevant new information.
( c ) As part of the reassessment, and where applicable, the Director (excluding the CDC official who issued the quarantine, isolation, or conditional release order) shall consider and make a determination regarding whether less restrictive alternatives would adequately serve to protect the public health.
( d ) At the conclusion of the reassessment, the Director (excluding the CDC official who issued the quarantine, isolation, or conditional release order) shall promptly issue and serve a written Federal order directing that the quarantine, isolation, or conditional release be continued, modified, or rescinded.
( e ) In the event that the Director orders that the quarantine, isolation, or conditional release be continued or modified, the written Federal order shall explain the process for requesting a medical review under this part.
( f ) The Director's written Federal order shall be promptly served on the individual, except that the Federal order may be served by publication or by posting in a conspicuous location if the Federal order is applicable to a group of individuals and individual service would be impracticable.
( g ) The Director shall arrange for translation or interpretation services of the Federal order as needed.
[82 FR 6971, Jan. 19, 2017]
§ 505.11 Loan application requirements and procedures. ( a ) The loan application must be received by CMS no later than 5 p.m. e.d.t. on December 29, 2005.
( b ) The requested information must be typed or clearly printed in ink and the loan beneficiary must mail or deliver an original copy of the loan to CMS. The loan application must contain the following information: ( 1 ) Qualifying hospital's name and street address.
( 2 ) Qualifying hospital's Medicare provider number.
( 3 ) Name, title, and telephone number of a contact person submitting the application.
( 4 ) Provide all appropriate supporting documentation for each answer made on the loan application.
* 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. 07-50957 Summary Calendar

PASCUAL Q. OLIBAS d/b/a FREEDOM BAIL BONDS Plaintiff-Appellee v. SHERIFF ARNULFO GOMEZ Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas, El Paso

3:05-CV-225
Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.. PER CURIAM: * Plaintiff-Appellee Pascual Q. Olibas, joined by his wife Cheryl Olibas, individually and doing business as Freedom Bail Bonds sued, inter alia, Sheriff Arnulfo Gomez of Reeves County, Texas pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the TexasConstitution, alleging constitutional wrongs. Sheriff Gomez filed a motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal grounded in qualified and official immunity. The district court denied qualified immunity in an Order signed July United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D March 6, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-50957

2 27, 2007 in which the court accepted the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate-judge who had, in an exhaustive analysis of the situation, recommended denial of qual ified immunity because the summary judgment evidence demonstrated the existence of factual disputes as to whether Sheriff Gomez acted with objective reasonableness, thereby preventing summary judgment on immunity. It is well settled that an appeal of an interlocutory ruling denying qualified immunity because of the existence of factual disputes does not present an exception to our lack of jurisdiction to hear appeals of interlocutory rulings. As that is the situation presented by this appeal, we do not havejurisdiction to hear SheriffGomez's appeal ofthe district court's denial of qualified immunity at this non-final stage of the proceedings in the district court. For lack of appellate jurisdiction, this appeal is DISMISSED.
§ 455.240 Conflict of interest resolution. ( a ) Review Board: CMS may establish a Conflicts of Interest Review Board to assist in resolving organizational conflicts of interest.
( b ) Resolution: Resolution of an organizational conflict of interest is a determination by the contracting officer that: ( 1 ) The conflict is mitigated.
( 2 ) The conflict precludes award of a contract to the offeror.
( 3 ) The conflict requires that CMS modify an existing contract.
( 4 ) The conflict requires that CMS terminate an existing contract.
( 5 ) It is in the best interest of the government to contract with the offeror or contractor even though the conflict of interest exists and a request for waiver is approved in accordance with 48 CFR 9.503.
[73 FR 55771, Sept. 26, 2008]
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1936 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1936

To amend the Small Business Act to increase the minimum Government-wide 
   goal for procurement contracts awarded to small business concerns.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 18, 2007

   Mr. Wynn introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Small Business

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Small Business Act to increase the minimum Government-wide 
   goal for procurement contracts awarded to small business concerns.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASE IN GOVERNMENT-WIDE GOAL FOR PROCUREMENT CONTRACTS 
              AWARDED TO SMALL BUSINESS CONCERNS.

    Section 15(g)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(g)(1)) is 
amended by striking ``23 percent'' and inserting ``25 percent''.
                                 <all>
```
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

JOSER E N DESHUNE DELANCY , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 21

- 1168

[ July 8, 2021 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.8 5 0 motion from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Martin County ; Sherwood Bauer , Judge; L.T. Case No. 43

- 2015

- CF

- 000390 A

.

Joser e n Deshune Delancy, Indiantown, pro se

.
No appearance required for appellee

.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed.

G ROSS , D AMOORGIAN and C IKLIN , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
SNAP-Ed nutrition education aligns with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and MyPlate. Find materials that focus on healthy eating, safe food, staying active, stretching food dollars, and more!  
            - Healthy Eating 
            - Eat Right When Money's Tight 
            - Cooking 
            - Physical Activity 
            - Food Safety 
            - Spanish Language Materials 
            - Meal Planning, Shopping, and Budgeting 
            - Gardening 
            - Farmers' Market 
            - Gleaning in SNAP-Ed 
            - Stay Safe During Emergencies 
            - FNS Curricula
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 23-1589

___________________________

Annie R. Irving

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Dierbergs Markets, Inc.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis

 ____________

 Submitted: September 21, 2023

Filed: October 6, 2023

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, KELLY, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Annie Irving appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment

in her employment discrimination action. After careful review of the record and the

1The Honorable Ronnie L. White, United States District Judge for the Eastern

District of Missouri.
parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that the grant of summary judgment was

proper. See Said v. Mayo Clinic, 44 F.4th 1142, 1147 (8th Cir. 2022) (grant of

summary judgment is reviewed de novo). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R.

47B. Appellee’s motion to strike is denied as moot.

______________________________

-2-
#### § 61.14 Separate consideration of information concerning moral character or loyalty.

No information in the records or possession of the Public Health Service concerning the moral character or loyalty of a fellow will be made available to any fellowship committee involved in recommending appointments of fellows.
HomeKey Topics – Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs...Protecting U.S. Citizens at Home and Abroad

# 									Protecting U.S. Citizens at Home and Abroad							

Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs

### Protecting U.S. Citizens at Home and Abroad

We champion the security of Americans at home by disrupting illicit networks and cutting off trafficking routes that lead to the United States while remaining vigilant to threats posed by external state and non-state actors. Our security assistance aims to defeat and destroy transnational criminal organizations (TCO’s) and prevent the extreme violence perpetrated in local communities and neighborhoods.  We support DHS’s efforts to secure our border. Abroad, we make the safety and security of our citizens our top priority by ensuring Americans have the right information and providing consular assistance. The United States’ partnerships with the nations of the Western Hemisphere to create tangible benefits for Americans and more secure communities for citizens in our partner nations.

Learn more about our how we protect U.S. citizens and work with our partners:

##### **Central America**

We protect American citizens by combatting drivers of illegal immigration and illicit trafficking, which in turn increases opportunities for U.S. businesses and their partners throughout the hemisphere. Learn more about our strategy and how it keeps U.S. citizens safe.

##### **The Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI)**

CBSI brings members of the Caribbean Community and the Dominican Republic to collaborate on regional security with the United States as a partner. Learn more about the initiative.

##### **Mexico**

To address transnational crime, the United States and Mexico collaborate to dismantle the business model of TCOs and reduce the supply of illicit opioids and other drugs to the United States, keeping Americans safe. Learn more about this initiative.

Back to Top
§ 93.500 General policy. ( a ) This subpart provides a respondent an opportunity to contest ORI findings of research misconduct and HHS administrative actions, including debarment or suspension, arising under 42 U.S.C. 289b in connection with PHS supported biomedical and behavioral research, research training, or activities related to that research or research training.
( b ) A respondent has an opportunity to contest ORI research misconduct findings and HHS administrative actions under this part, including debarment or suspension, by requesting an administrative hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) affiliated with the HHS DAB, when— ( 1 ) ORI has made a finding of research misconduct against a respondent; and
( 2 ) The respondent has been notified of those findings and any proposed HHS administrative actions, including debarment or suspension, in accordance with this part.
( c ) The ALJ's ruling on the merits of the ORI research misconduct findings and the HHS administrative actions is subject to review by the Assistant Secretary for Health in accordance with § 93.523. The decision made under that section is the final HHS action, unless that decision results in a recommendation for debarment or suspension. In that case, the decision under § 93.523 shall constitute findings of fact to the debarring official in accordance with 45 CFR 76.845(c).
( d ) Where a proposed debarment or suspension action is based upon an ORI finding of research misconduct, the procedures in this part provide the notification, opportunity to contest, and fact-finding required under the HHS debarment and suspension regulations at 45 CFR part 76, subparts H and G, respectively, and 48 CFR Subparts 9.4 and 309.4.
#### § 491.3 Certification procedures.

A rural health clinic will be certified for participation in Medicare in accordance with subpart S of 42 CFR part 405. The Secretary will notify the State Medicaid agency whenever he has certified or denied certification under Medicare for a prospective rural health clinic in that State. A clinic certified under Medicare will be deemed to meet the standards for certification under Medicaid.

[71 FR 55346, Sept. 22, 2006]