alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 18.423 New construction. ( a ) *Design and construction.* Each facility or part of a facility constructed by, on behalf of, or for the use of a recipient shall be designed and constructed so that the facility or part of the facility is readily accessible to and usable by handicapped persons, if the construction was commenced after the effective date of this part.
( b ) *Alteration.* Each facility or part of a facility which is altered by, on behalf of, or for the use of a recipient after the effective date of this part in a manner that affects or could affect the usability of the facility or part of the facility shall, to the maximum extent feasible, be altered so that the altered portion of the facility is readily accessible to and usable by handicapped persons.
( c ) *Conformance with Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards.* ( 1 ) Effective as of January 18, 1991, design, construction, or alteration of buildings in conformance with sections 3-8 of the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (USAF) (appendix A to 41 CFR subpart 101-19.6) shall be deemed to comply with the requirements of this section with respect to those buildings. Departures from particular technical and scoping requirements of UFAS by the use of other methods are permitted where substantially equivalent or greater access to and usability of the building is provided.
( 2 ) For purposes of this section, section 4.1.6(1)(g) of UFAS shall be interpreted to exempt from the requirements of UFAS only mechanical rooms and other spaces that, because of their intended use, will not require accessibility to the public or beneficiaries or result in the employment or residence therein of persons with physical handicaps.
( 3 ) This section does not require recipients to make building alterations that have little likelihood of being accomplished without removing or altering a load-bearing structural member.
[45 FR 63268, Sept. 24, 1980, as amended at 55 FR 52138, 52141, Dec. 19, 1990]
§ 21.5137 Benefit payments and charges against entitlement for taking an approved licensing or certification test. ( a ) *Benefit payments.* The amount of educational assistance allowance VA will pay to a veteran or servicemember for taking an approved licensing or certification test, if the veteran or servicemember is entitled to receive such benefit payments, will be the lowest of the following: ( 1 ) The fee the organization or entity offering the test charges for taking the test;
( 2 ) $2,000; or
( 3 ) The total remaining amount of the veteran's or servicemember's contributions to the fund and the contributions the Secretary of Defense has made to the fund on behalf of the veteran or servicemember. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3222, 3231, 3232(c), 3452(b), 3689)
( b ) *Charge against entitlement.* For educational assistance allowance paid for taking an approved licensing or certification test, VA will make a charge against the veteran's or servicemember's entitlement by dividing the amount paid under paragraph (a) of this section by the monthly amount as calculated under § 21.5138(c). The calculation will assume that the veteran or servicemember is a full-time student.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3232(c), 3452(b), 3689)
[72 FR 16978, Apr. 5, 2007]
###### 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.

#### § 1.155 Expedited examination of design applications.

(a) The applicant may request that the Office expedite the examination of a design application. To qualify for expedited examination:

(1) The application must include drawings in compliance with § 1.84, or for an international design application that designates the United States, must have been published pursuant to Hague Agreement Article 10(3);

(2) The applicant must have conducted a preexamination search; and

(3) The applicant must file a request for expedited examination including:

(i) The fee set forth in § 1.17(k); and

(ii) A statement that a preexamination search was conducted. The statement must also indicate the field of search and include an information disclosure statement in compliance with § 1.98.

(b) The Office will not examine an application that is not in condition for examination (*e.g.,* missing basic filing fee) even if the applicant files a request for expedited examination under this section.

[65 FR 54674, Sept. 8, 2000, as amended at 80 FR 17963, Apr. 2, 2015]

###### 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.
§ 201.24 Warning of copyright for software lending by nonprofit libraries. ( a ) *Definition.* A Warning of Copyright for Software Rental is a notice under paragraph (b)(2)(A) of section 109 of the Copyright Act, title 17 of the United States Code, as amended by the Computer Software Rental Amendments Act of 1990, Public Law 101-650. As required by that paragraph, the “Warning of Copyright for Software Rental” shall be affixed to the packaging that contains the computer program which is lent by a nonprofit library for nonprofit purposes.
( b ) *Contents.* A Warning of Copyright for Software Rental shall consist of a verbatim reproduction of the following notice, printed in such size and form and affixed in such manner as to comply with paragraph (c) of this section. Notice: Warning of Copyright Restrictions The copyright law of the United States (title 17, United States Code) governs the reproduction, distribution, adaptation, public performance, and public display of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in law, nonprofit libraries are authorized to lend, lease, or rent copies of computer programs to patrons on a nonprofit basis and for nonprofit purposes. Any person who makes an unauthorized copy or adaptation of the computer program, or redistributes the loan copy, or publicly performs or displays the computer program, except as permitted by title 17 of the United States Code, may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to fulfill a loan request if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the request would lead to violation of the copyright law.
( c ) *Form and manner of use.* A Warning of Copyright for Software Rental shall be affixed to the packaging that contains the copy of the computer program, which is the subject of a library loan to patrons, by means of a label cemented, gummed, or otherwise durably attached to the copies or to a box, reel, cartridge, cassette, or other container used as a permanent receptacle for the copy of the computer program. The notice shall be printed in such manner as to be clearly legible, comprehensible, and readily apparent to a casual user of the computer program.
[56 FR 7812, Feb. 26, 1991, as amended at 66 FR 34373, June 28, 2001]
V 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2180 

For the relief of Adela and Darryl Bailor. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 3, 2007 

Ms. CARSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Adela and Darryl Bailor. 

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

3 SECTION 1. COMPENSATION OF CERTAIN LOSSES. 

4 (a) PAYMENT.—The Secretary of the Treasury shall 

5 pay, not later than 18 months after the date of the enact6 ment of this Act, out of funds not otherwise appropriated, 

7 to Adela and Darryl Bailor the amount determined by the 

8 chief judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims. 

9 (b) SETTLEMENT.—The payment of this sum shall 

10 be in full settlement of all claims of Adela and Darryl Bail11 or arising from an incident on May 9, 1991, that is the 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HR 2180 IH

1 subject of Case No. 94–2660 in the United States Court 

2 of Appeals for the 7th Circuit. 

3 (c) NO INFERENCE OF LIABILITY.—Nothing in this 

4 Act shall be construed as an inference of liability on the 

5 part of the United States. 

6 (d) LIMITATION.—No person shall have any claim on 

7 the amount described in this section, whether contractual, 

8 equitable or statutory, except for reasonable attorneys fees 

9 and expenses that do not exceed 10 percent of the amount 

10 paid under subsection (a). 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
Storage

Tank

55 

Gallon

Drum

pump

Vent to scrubber

3

PROCESS DIAGRAM

Tote 

or 

Drum

pump

pump

55 

Gallon

Drum

pump

Finished 

Product

2

1

Sample for

Lab analysis

Isocyanate

Ingredients

Solvent
August 5, 2016

Memorandum to Docket ID # EPA-R08-OAR-2013-0145

Subject: Communication with State of North Dakota regarding error in SIP submittal

From: Jaslyn Dobrahner, Environmental Protection Specialist

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8

On July 29, 2016, EPA and the State of North Dakota discussed an error found in the state’s 

January 2013 state implementation plan (SIP) submittal. EPA noted that the reference to 40 CFR 

52.21(k)(1) in North Dakota’s state regulations found at 33-15-15-01.2 should read 40 CFR 

52.21(k)(1)(i) instead of 40 CFR 52.21(k)(1). 

On August 1, 2016, the state acknowledged the error and committed to revising it in the next rule 

revision.
###### 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 Part 3

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3 appear at 68 FR 14337, Mar. 25, 2003.

#### § 3.27 Mailing address for submitting documents to be recorded.

Documents and cover sheets submitted by mail for recordation should be addressed to Mail Stop Assignment Recordation Services, Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450, unless they are filed together with new applications.

[69 FR 29879, May 26, 2004]

###### 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.
October 26 , 2017



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

DONALD E

. KILPATRICK , Appellant

NO. 14

- 17

- 00356

- CV V.

NOBLE CAPITAL SERVIC ING LLC , Appellee

________________________________ Today the Court heard its own motion to dismiss the appeal from the judgment signed by the court below on February 22, 2017. Having considered the motion and found it meritorious, we order the appeal DISMISSED

. We further order that all costs incurred by reason of this appea l be paid by appellant, Donald E

. Kilpatrick.
We further order this decision certified below for observance.
#### § 21.5816 False or fraudulent claims.

Each individual, or school officer or official shall be subject to civil penalties or criminal penalties, or both, under applicable Federal law for submitting a false or fraudulent report, revision to a report, or verification of accuracy of a report used to support an individual's claim, even though the report or verification is provided gratuitously or voluntarily to VA.

(Authority: 31 U.S.C. 3729-3731, 18 U.S.C. 1001)
#### §§ 205.6-205.10 [Reserved]
The Attorney General of Texas 

November 29, 1978 

JOHN L. HILL 

Attorney General 

Honorable Reagan V. Brown 

Commissioner 

Texas Department of Agriculture 

P. 0. Box 12847 

Austin, Texas 787R 

Opinion No. H-12 6 3 

Re: Whether the Agricultural 

Protective Act, prior to the 1977 

amendment, applied to vegetables which were not listed in the 

Act. 

Dear Commissioner Brown: 

You ask whether it was the intent of the legislature to exclude from 

section l(b) of the Agricultural Protective Act, V.T.C.S. article 1287-3, 

certain agricultural commodities. You also ask if the Texas Department of 

Agriculture can consider an action of license revocation against a commissioned merchant when the complaint is based on a transaction involving 

nonlisted vegetables. We note initially that the transaction giving rise to 

your question occurred prior to the amendment of the statute and thus our 

response is limited to the statute as it existed prior to the 1977 amendments. 

All references are to the pre-1977 form of the statute. 

Section l(b) of this Act read as follows: 

‘Vegetables’ shall include agricultural commodities and 

mean any and all of the following enumerated 

commodities: asparagus, beans (string, wax or green), 

beets (bunched or topped), broccoli (Italian sprouting), 

cabbage (for sauerkraut), cantaloupes, carrots 

(bunched or clipped), cauliflower, celery (rough), corn 

(green), cucumbers (slicing), dewberries and blackberries, eggplant, endive, or escarole or chicory, 

garlic, kale, lettuce, melons (honey ball and honey 

dew), mustard greens, okra, onions, parsley, peaches, 

pears, peas (fresh), peppers (sweet), potatoes, potatoes 

(sweet), radishes, romaine, shallots, spinach, strawberries, tomatoes (fresh), turnips (bunched or topped), 

or rutabagas, turnip greens and watermelons. 

Since it is generally the case that the legislative intention of a statute is 

primarily found in the language of that statute, “twlhen the Legislature gives 

P. 5005 
Honorable Reagan V. Brown - Page 2 (R-12631 

a specific meaning to a word or term, that definition controls.” Childers v. State, 

202 S.W.Bd 930, 931 (Tex. Crim. App. 19471. 

The power to revoke licenses extends only to violations of the Act. Since the 

Act was structured to apply only to vegetables falling within the section l(b) 

definition, it is our view that a license may not be cancelled for a transaction 

Involving nonlisted items since such a transaction would not constitute a violation 

of the Act. 

SUMMARY 

The Agricultural Protective Act prior to the 1977 amendments did not apply to vegetables not listed in the Act. The 

Department of Agriculture does not have authority to 

consider license revocation actions against commissioned 

merchants when the complaint is based on nonlisted 

vegetables. 

Attorney General of Texas 

APPROVED: 

Opinion Committee 

p. 5006
#### § 10.53 Payment on duplicate certificate.

Issuance of duplicate adjusted service certificates and payment of claims based upon lost, destroyed, or mutilated, adjusted service certificates. (See §§ 10.1 to 10.4, 10.24 and 10.25, respectively.)
§ 20.601 Rule 601. Methods by which hearings in legacy appeals are conducted; scheduling and notice provisions for such hearings. ( a ) *Methods by which hearings in legacy appeals are conducted.* A hearing on appeal before the Board may be held by one of the following methods: ( 1 ) In person at the Board's principal location in Washington, DC;
( 2 ) By electronic hearing, through voice transmission or through picture and voice transmission, with the appellant appearing at a Department of Veterans Affairs facility or appropriate Federal facility; or
( 3 ) At a Department of Veterans Affairs facility having adequate physical resources and personnel for the support of such hearings.
( b ) *Electronic hearings.* An appropriate Federal facility consists of a Federal facility having adequate physical resources and personnel for the support of such hearings.
( c ) *Provisions for scheduling and providing notice of hearings in legacy appeals.* ( 1 ) The procedures for scheduling and providing notice of Board hearings in legacy appeals conducted by the methods described in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section are contained in Rule 704 (§ 20.704).
( 2 ) The procedures for scheduling and providing notice of Board hearings in legacy appeals conducted at a Department of Veterans Affairs facility having adequate physical resources and personnel for the support of such hearings under (a)(3) are contained in Rule 603 (§ 20.603).
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7107; Sec. 102, Pub. L. 114-315; 130 Stat. 1536)
[84 FR 186, Jan. 18, 2019]
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 3.1

                                  AMENDMENT TO
                          BY-LAWS OF HADCO CORPORATION


         This Amendment (the "Amendment") to the By-Laws of Hadco Corporation
(the "By-Laws") is effective as of April 17, 2000. The By-Laws shall be amended
as follows:

         The following language shall be added as Paragraph 8 to Article VI
thereof:

         8.  1987 MASSACHUSETTS CONTROL SHARE ACQUISITION ACT. The 1987
             Massachusetts Control Share Acquisition Act, Chapter 110D of
             the Massachusetts General Laws, as it may be amended from time
             to time, shall not apply to the Corporation.

         Except as specifically amended hereby, each of the provisions of the
By-Laws are hereby ratified and confirmed and shall remain in full force and
effect.
41801.

#### KIMBRO v. THE STATE.

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

Norman Kimbro was indicted for the murder of Nora Bell Turner and convicted of assault with intent to murder. Thereafter, his motion for new trial was overruled and on appeal he complains of an excerpt from the charge, the failure to charge, and contends that the verdict returned was not authorized by the evidence.

On the trial of the case the death certificate was not introduced in evidence, nor did the physician who attended the deceased when she died testify, and the only testimony as to the cause of death was by a lay witness who testified as to the location of the wounds on the body and based upon such facts testified that he believed the cause of death to be such gunshot wounds.

*■Held:*

1. Where one is charged with murder by shooting and the evidence does not demand a finding that the victim died from such gunshot wounds and the defendant admits the shooting, a verdict of guilty of assault with intent to murder may be authorized and it is not error to charge the jury on such lesser crime. See *Pope v. State,*13 Ga. App. 711 (2) (79 SE *315909); *Watson v. State,*116 Ga. 607 (43 SE 32); *Smith v. State,*126 Ga. 544 (55 SE 475), and citations.

Submitted February 8, 1966

Decided February 24, 1966

Rehearing denied March 14, 1966

*Ballard & Thigpen, W. D. Ballard, Troy A. Thigpen, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Richard Bell, Solicitor General,*for appellee.

(a) The evidence authorized the verdict of guilty of assault with intent to murder and the trial court did not err in charging thereon.

2. Assuming without deciding that under all the evidence a charge on self-defense was authorized, in the absence of a timely request for a more detailed charge on such subject the charge given sufficiently covered the law of self-defense.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Hall and Deen, JJ., concur.*
§ 88.20 Authorization of treatment. ( a ) *Generally.* Medically necessary treatment of certified WTC-related health conditions and certified health conditions medically associated with WTC-related health conditions will be provided through the CCEs or the NPN as permitted under WTC Health Program treatment protocols and in accordance with all applicable WTC Health Program policies and procedures.
( b ) *Standard for determining medical necessity.* All treatment provided under the WTC Health Program will adhere to a standard which is reasonable and appropriate; based on scientific evidence, professional standards of care, expert opinion or any other relevant information; and which has been included in the medical treatment protocols developed by the Data Centers, with input from the CCEs, and approved by the Administrator of the WTC Health Program.
( c ) *Treatment pending certification.* While certification of a condition is pending, authorization for treatment of a WTC-related health condition or a health condition medically associated with a WTC-related health condition must be obtained from the WTC Health Program before treatment is provided, except for the provision of treatment for a medical emergency.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           7,826
<SECURITIES>                                     2,680
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,669
<ALLOWANCES>                                        88
<INVENTORY>                                      3,627
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                22,365
<PP&E>                                          11,290
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (8,911)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  30,552
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,419
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,334
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,799
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    30,552
<SALES>                                          3,266
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,584
<CGS>                                            2,798
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,114
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (442)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (886)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (319)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (567)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (567)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.04)
        

</TABLE>