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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1931 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1931

 To amend the Federal Reserve Act to require the production of Federal 
 reserve notes in a manner which enables an individual who is blind to 
 determine the denomination of each such note, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 18, 2007

  Mr. Stark introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Federal Reserve Act to require the production of Federal 
 reserve notes in a manner which enables an individual who is blind to 
 determine the denomination of each such note, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Catherine Skivers Currency for All 
Act''.

SEC. 2. DISTINCTIVE FEATURES REQUIRED FOR EACH FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE 
              DENOMINATION.

    (a) In General.--Section 16 of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 
418) is amended in the 8th undesignated paragraph--
            (1) by striking ``In order to furnish suitable notes for 
        circulation'' and inserting the following:
    ``(h) Engraving of Plates; Denomination and Form of Notes.--
            ``(1) In general.--`In order to furnish suitable notes for 
        circulation'''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(2) Distinctive features for various denominations.--
        Before being put into circulation, each Federal reserve note 
        the denomination of which is $50 or less shall be trimmed in 
        the manner required under this paragraph so as to make the 
        denomination of such note recognizable to an individual who is 
        blind:
                    ``(A) All 4 corners of each $1 Federal reserve 
                note.
                    ``(B) 3 corners of each $2 Federal reserve note.
                    ``(C) Upper left-hand and lower right-hand corners 
                of each $5 Federal reserve note.
                    ``(D) Upper left-hand and upper right-hand corners 
                of each $10 Federal reserve note.
                    ``(E) Upper left-hand and lower left-hand corner of 
                each $20 Federal reserve note.
                    ``(F) 1 corner of each $50 Federal reserve note.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--Paragraph (2) of section 16(h) of the Federal 
Reserve Act (as added by subsection (a) of this section) shall apply to 
each Federal reserve note the denomination of which is $50 or less 
which is put into circulation after the end of the 90-day period 
beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...International Holocaust Remembrance Day

# 									International Holocaust Remembrance Day							

Press Statement

The Secretary of State

January 27, 2024

Today, and every day, we mourn the six million Jews who were murdered during the Holocaust by the Nazis and their collaborators, as well as the Roma, Sinti, political opponents, persons with disabilities, LGBTQI+ individuals, and others persecuted and murdered by the Nazi regime.  The Holocaust began with words – with labeling others as different, “less than,” a threat. Today, we hear disturbing words again in the midst of rising antisemitism.  To honor the victims of the Nazis, we reaffirm our commitment to combating Holocaust denial and distortion by speaking out, promoting accurate Holocaust education, and by standing against hate in all its forms.  The truth of the Holocaust is not up for debate, and neither is the relevance of the admonition of those who endured its horrors: “never again.”

The United States stands with Holocaust victims, their families, and their descendants.  We remember and we carry forward the legacy of survivors and their families when we apply the lessons of the Holocaust to combat antisemitism and other forms of intolerance.  We do so as we work with people of conscience everywhere to build a world where hate has no place.

Tags

AntisemitismBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborBureau of European and Eurasian AffairsEducationHolocaust IssuesHuman RightsHuman Rights and DemocracyLGBT RightsOffice of the Special Envoy for Holocaust IssuesOffice of the Special Envoy To Monitor and Combat AntisemitismOffice of the SpokespersonPartnershipsThe Secretary of State

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
(Information of particle size and specific surface area of CSA#20) 

HORIBA LA-920 for Windows TM [WET (LA-920)] ver.3.70 

LA-920 system for Windows 

(Condition of measurement, left side) 

File name : 13061102 

ID# : 201306111333925 

Circulation velocity : 5 

Ultrasonic wave : 01:00 (7) 

Transmittance (L) : 87.7 (%) 

Transmittance (H) : 87.9 (%) 

Particle radius criteria : cubic volume 

Relative refractive index : 130a0001 

Sample name : CSA untreated 

Substance name : 

Dispersion medium : ethanol 

(Result, right side) 

Specific surface are : 7449.6 cm2/cm3

Median size : 14.1302 (μm) 

Diameter of each cumulative % of particles: 

(Caption of the figure) 

(left vertical axis) frequency (%) 

(right vertical axis) cumulative percent passing (%) 

(bottom horizontal axis) particle diameter (μm) 

(Caption of the table from left) 

No., Particle radius (μm), Frequency (%), Integration (%),
§ 20.205 Rule 205. Withdrawal of appeal. ( a ) *When and by whom filed.* Only an appellant, or an appellant's authorized representative, may withdraw an appeal. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal.
( b ) *Filing* — ( 1 ) *Content.* Appeal withdrawals must include the name of the veteran, the name of the claimant or appellant if other than the veteran (*e.g.,* a veteran's survivor, a guardian, or a fiduciary appointed to receive VA benefits on an individual's behalf), the applicable Department of Veterans Affairs file number, and a statement that the appeal is withdrawn. If the appeal involves multiple issues, the withdrawal must specify that the appeal is withdrawn in its entirety, or list the issue(s) withdrawn from the appeal.
( 2 ) *Where to file.* Appeal withdrawals should be filed with the Board.
( 3 ) *When effective.* An appeal withdrawal is effective when received by the Board. A withdrawal received after the Board issues a final decision under Rule 1100(a) (§ 20.1100(a)) will not be effective.
( c ) *Effect of filing.* Withdrawal of an appeal will be deemed a withdrawal of the Notice of Disagreement as to all issues to which the withdrawal applies. Withdrawal does not preclude filing a new Notice of Disagreement pursuant to this subpart, a request for higher-level review under 38 U.S.C. 5104B, or a supplemental claim under 38 U.S.C. 5108, as to any issue withdrawn, provided such filing would be timely under these rules if the withdrawn appeal had never been filed.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 7105)
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 48230]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22893]


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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Agency Holding the Meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, October 30, 2009.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room

Status: Closed.

Matters To Be Considered: Surveillance Matters.

Contact Person for More Information: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-22893 Filed 9-18-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
#### Benjamin F. Winfield, Appellant, *v.*Frederick A. Cauchois, Respondent.

Appeal from a judgment dismissing the complaint of the plaintiff, rendered in the Municipal Court, eighth district, borough of Manhattan. „ ' • : >

Lee McCallum,.for appellant.

Arthur C. Palmer, for'respondent.

*774Freedman, P. J.

This action was brought by the plaintiff, as assignee of the cause of action, to recover the value of work, labor and materials furnished by his assignors to the defendant.1' The pleadings'were verified. The sufficiency 'Of the denial of the assignment contained in the answer may be questioned, but in fact the trial proceeded upon the assumption 'that the assignment -had been put in issue, and the testimony of the plaintiff utterly failed to establish an assignment. . ' .

But, independently of. that qiiestion, the dismissal of the- com'plaint for insufficiency of proof cannot be disturbed for the following reason, viz.: The answer fully and sufficiently denied the allegations'of the complaint as to the performance of the work and labor, and the furnishing of the materials, and upon these points the plaintiff neither gave nor offered to give testimony. He should at least have moved for leave to complete his case and offered to prove performance^ but he closed his case without making any such effort. Judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

MagLeah and .Leventeitt, J J., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs'to respondent.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2276 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

203 North Main Street in Vassar, Michigan, as the ‘‘Corporal Christopher E. Esckelson Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 10, 2007 

Mr. KILDEE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 203 North Main Street in Vassar, Michigan, 

as the ‘‘Corporal Christopher E. Esckelson 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. CORPORAL CHRISTOPHER E. ESCKELSON POST 

4 OFFICE BUILDING. 

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

6 Postal Service located at 203 North Main Street in Vas7 sar, Michigan, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Cor8 poral Christopher E. Esckelson Post Office Building’’. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2276 IH

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 ‘‘Corporal Christopher 

5 E. Esckelson Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS
MAINE	SUPREME	JUDICIAL	COURT Reporter	of	Decisions

Decision: 2020 ME	13

Docket: Ken-19-355

Submitted	

		On	Briefs: January 23,	2020

Decided: January	30,	2020

Panel: ALEXANDER,	MEAD,	GORMAN,	JABAR,	and	HUMPHREY,	JJ.

ADULT	GUARDIANSHIP	OF	L.

JABAR,	J.

[¶1]	 	 L.	 appeals	 from	 an	 order	 of	 the	 Kennebec	 County	 Probate	 Court	

(Mitchell,	 J.) determining	 that	 L.	 “failed	 to	 prove	 by	 clear	 and	 convincing	

evidence	that	his [adult] guardianship	is	no	longer	necessary	for	his	safety	and	

well-being” and denying	 his	 petition	 for	 termination	 of	 that guardianship.

L. contends,	and	the	Department	of	Health	and	Human	Services	concedes,	that

the	 court	 applied	 an	 incorrect	 standard	 of	 proof in	 contravention	 of	

18-A M.R.S.	§	5-307(d)	(2018).1		

[¶2]		“What	party	has	the	burden	of	proof	.	.	.	is	a	legal	question.		Legal	

questions	 are	 subject	 to	 de	 novo	 review.”	 	 Steelstone	 Indus.,	 Inc.	 v.	 McCrum,	

2001	ME	171,	¶ 6,	785	A.2d	1256.		Thus,	the	court’s	application	of	the	law	to	

the	facts	is	reviewed	de	novo.		Estate	of	Greenblatt,	2014	ME	32,	¶ 12,	86	A.3d	

 1 The	citations	here	are	to	Title	18-A, the	Probate	Code	in	effect	at	the	time of	the	court’s	order.		

The	Code	has	been repealed	and replaced	with	a	new	Probate	Code, codified	in	Title	18-C,	which	

became effective	on	September	1,	2019.	 See P.L.	2019,	ch.	417;	P.L.	2017,	ch.	402.
2

1215.	 	 Section 5-307(d)	 sets	 forth	 the	 burden	 of	 proof	 applicable	 to	 this	

petition	for	termination	of	guardianship and	provides:

In	 an	 action	 by	 the	ward,	 upon	 presentation	 by	 the	 petitioner	 of

evidence	 establishing	 a	 prima	 facie	 case that	 the	 ward	 is	 not	

incapacitated	 or	 the	 appointment	 is	 no	 longer	 necessary	 or	

desirable	as	a	means	of	providing	continuing	care	and	supervision	

of	 the	 ward,	 the	 court	 shall	 order	 the	 termination	 unless	 the

respondent	proves	by	clear	and	convincing	evidence that	 the	ward	

is	 incapacitated	 and	 guardianship	 is	 necessary	 or	 desirable	 as	 a	

means	of	providing	continuing	care	and	supervision	of	the	ward.

18-A	M.R.S.	§	5-307(d)	(emphasis	added).		

[¶3] In	 stating that “[t]he	 Petitioner	 failed	 to	 prove	 by	 clear	 and	

convincing	evidence	that	his	guardianship	is	no	longer	necessary	for	his	safety	

and	well-being[,]”	the	 court	failed	 to	 apply	 the	 proper statutory standard	 of	

proof.		We therefore vacate	the	judgment	and	remand	to	the	probate	court	for	

application	 of	 the	 correct	 standard	 of	 proof.	 See	 Emerson	 v.	 Cty.	 Concrete	

& Const.	Co., 614	A.2d	549,	550	(Me.	1992).

The	entry	is:

Judgment	 vacated.	 	 Remanded	 for	 proceedings	

consistent	with	this	opinion.
3

Robert	Marks,	Esq.,	Washington,	for	appellant	L.	

Aaron	 Frey,	Attorney	General, and	Cody	M.P.	Hopkins,	Asst.	Atty.	Gen.,	Office	

of	 the	 Attorney	 General,	 Augusta,	 for	 appellee	 Department	 of	 Health	 and	

Human	Services

Kennebec	County	Probate	Court	docket	number	2008-0172-1

FOR	CLERK	REFERENCE	ONLY
#### Matter of the Application of the New Paltz and Wallkill Valley Railroad Company, for Dissolution.

(Supreme Court, New York Special Term,

May, 1899.)

Corporations — Expenses of voluntary dissolution and appointment of receiver made a first charge on fund.

Where the directors of a corporation, which has issued first mortgage bonds, apply for a voluntary dissolution and for the appointment of a receiver in order to protect the corporate property, the expenses of the application may properly be made a charge to be first paid by the receiver out of the funds in his hands, although he was not appointed in an action brought by the bondholders or their trustee.

This was a . motion by the • first mortgage bondholders of The Mew Paltz *&*Wallkill Valley Bailroad Company, to modify a portion of an order made in the. proceedings for voluntary dissolution. That portion of the order referred was as follows: “ Ordered that the expenses of the Dissolution Proceedings herein, consisting of printing, advertising, attorneys’ fees, referee and stenographers’ fees and disbursements, amounting to the sum of $1,919.09, be paid out of the funds in the hands of James Q-. Graham, Esq., Temporary Beceiver, and in case such funds should prove insufficient, the. same to constitute a first charge upon the property coming into the possession of said Edward Browne, Esq., as Permanent Beceiver.”

Hyde *&*Leonard, for motion.

James Harold Warner, opposed.

Truax, J.

In instituting these proceedings the defendants were acting as trustees and the expenses they incurred while so *452acting, were incurred in preserving the "property, and should, be paid out of the funds in the hands of the receiver before all other liens, although the -receiver was not appointed in an action brought • by'the bondholders or their trustee. Union Trust Co. v. Illinois Midland R. Co., 117 U. S. 434.

It was held .in Barnes v. Newcomb, 89 N. Y. 108, that where the officers óf an insolvent corporation believe it to.be solvent, and have reasonable grounds for such belief,' it is their duty to oppose an application for the dissolution of the corporation and their reasonable expenses in so doing should be allowed to them to be paid' out of the funds in the hands of the receiver.. It seems to me that if such expenses' should he allowed, it is right to allow the. expenses, incurred in protecting the property by procuring the appointment of a receiver, especially in view of the fact that the directors of the corporation who apply for the appointment of the receiver, and the dissohitipn .of the’ corporation, are not personally liable to the attorney for his services in the matter. Drew v. Longwell, 81 Hun, 144.

The referee.has consented that his fee be reduced to the sum; of $200, 'and the moving party hereto acquiesces. To that extent the order heretofore made will be modified. In other respects the" motion is denied, without costs.'

Order modified, and motion denied, without costs.
#### § 231.3 Response to request for Register's review.

A party opposing the request for review may file a response to the request for review within 30 days of the date of service of the request. Such response shall be no more than 12 pages and shall meet the requirements set forth in § 220.5(b) of this subchapter. The request must include the reasons the party believes there was no abuse of discretion in denying the request for reconsideration. No reply filings shall be permitted.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 48567]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22983]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Performance Review Board

AGENCY: Federal Maritime Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the names of the members of the 
Performance Review Board.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harriette H. Charbonneau, Director of 
Human Resources, Federal Maritime Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20573.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Sections 4314(c)(1) through (5) of title 5, 
U.S.C., requires each agency to establish, in accordance with 
regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or 
more performance review boards. The board shall review and evaluate the 
initial appraisal of a senior executive's performance by the 
supervisor, along with any recommendations to the appointing authority 
relative to the performance of the senior executive.

Richard A. Lidinsky, Jr.,
Chairman.
    The Members of the Performance Review Board Are:
    1. Joseph E. Brennan, Commissioner.
    2. Rebecca F. Dye, Commissioner.
    3. Clay G. Guthridge, Administrative Law Judge.
    4. Florence A. Carr, Director, Bureau of Trade Analysis.
    5. Karen V. Gregory, Secretary.
    6. Vern W. Hill, Director, Bureau of Enforcement.
    7. Peter J. King, General Counsel.
    8. Sandra L. Kusumoto, Director, Bureau of Certification and 
Licensing.
    9. Austin L. Schmitt, Director of Operations.

[FR Doc. E9-22983 Filed 9-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002:





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Auto Underwriters of America, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Dean
Antonis, as Principal Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:





(1)
            the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
            the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.








/s/
      Dean AntonisDean
      AntonisTreasurer
      (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)Date:
      May 16, 2008











This
certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.
Order entered April 10 , 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 14

- 00066

- CR

CRAIG DICKEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cau se No. F06

- 99720

- L



### O RDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On March 4, 2014, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why the clerk’s

and reporter’s records had not been filed

. On March 21, 2014, we received the clerk’s record

and on April 4 , 2014, we received the reporter’s record. Therefore, in the interest of expediting

the appeal, we VACATE the March 4, 2014 order requiring findings.

Appellant’s brief is due within thirty days of the date of this order.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
Editorial Note on Part 212
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 212 appear at 82 FR 9366, Feb. 6, 2017.

§ 212.5 Recordation of distinctive identification of vessel designer. ( a ) *General.* Any owner of a vessel design may record a distinctive identification with the Register of Copyrights for purposes of using such distinctive identification in a design protection notice required by 17 U.S.C. 1306. A distinctive identification of an owner may not be used in a design notice before it has first been recorded with the Register.
( b ) *Forms.* The Copyright Office does not provide forms for the use of persons recording distinctive identifications of ownership of a vessel design. However, persons recording distinctive identifications are encouraged to use the suggested format available on the Copyright Office website (*http://www.loc.gov/copyright/vessels*).
( c ) *Recording distinctive identifications.* Any distinctive identification of an owner of a vessel design may be recorded with the Register of Copyrights provided that a document containing the following is submitted: ( 1 ) The name and address of the owner;
( 2 ) A statement of the owner that he/she is entitled to use the distinctive identification;
( 3 ) A statement or depiction of the identification; and
( 4 ) The recordation fee in the amount prescribed in § 201.3(c) of this chapter.
( d ) The document should be mailed to the address specified in § 201.1(b)(2) of this chapter.
[64 FR 36578, July 7, 1999, as amended at 67 FR 38005, May 31, 2002; 72 FR 33692, June 19, 2007; 82 FR 9366, Feb. 6, 2017]