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

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2192 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish an Ombudsman within 

the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2007 

Mr. HODES introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to establish an 

Ombudsman within the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF OFFICE OF THE OMBUDS4 MAN IN DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AF5 FAIRS. 

6 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Chapter 3 of title 38, United 

7 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing new section: 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2192 IH

1 ‘‘§ 321. Office of the Ombudsman 

2 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—There is established in the De3 partment an Office of the Ombudsman (in this section re4 ferred to as the Office). The Secretary shall designate an 

5 Ombudsman to carry out the duties of the Office. 

6 ‘‘(b) DUTIES.—The Office shall act as a liaison for 

7 veterans and their family members with respect to the re8 ceipt of health care and benefits administered by the De9 partment. 

10 ‘‘(c) AVAILABILITY OF SERVICES.—The Secretary 

11 shall ensure that the services of the Office are available 

12 to all veterans and their family members. 

13 ‘‘(d) CONFIDENTIALITY.—Any information provided 

14 by veterans or their family members to the Office may 

15 be disclosed only to the extent necessary to carry out the 

16 duties of the Office. 

17 ‘‘(e) OUTREACH.—The Secretary shall make available 

18 to each veteran, and to the family members of all veterans, 

19 information on contacting and utilizing the services of the 

20 Office.’’. 

21 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections 

22 at the beginning of such chapter is amended by adding 

23 at the end the following new item: 

‘‘321. Office of the Ombudsman.’’. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
IIB 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2078 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 22, 2007 

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

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 14536 State Route 136 in Cherry Fork, Ohio, 

as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Omer ‘O.T.’ Hawkins Post Office’’. 

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


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

HR 2078 RFS

1 SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT OMER T. ‘‘O.T.’’ HAWKINS 

2 POST OFFICE. 

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

4 Postal Service located at 14536 State Route 136 in Cher5 ry Fork, Ohio, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Staff Sergeant Omer T. ‘O.T.’ Hawkins Post Office’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

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

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Omer 

11 T. ‘O.T.’ Hawkins Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 21, 2007. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Article 5 Fin. Data Schedule for 1st Qtr 10-QSB
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   		3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          			DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   			 MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                                 	166910
<SECURITIES>                                     		0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 			1330561
<ALLOWANCES>                                 			0
<INVENTORY>                                     		2193046
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          			4608850
<PP&E>                                                 	1867190
<DEPRECIATION>                               			1265001
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                			5243043
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  				1852609
<BONDS>                                             		0
<COMMON>                                          		42984
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>            					0
<PREFERRED>                                      		0
<OTHER-SE>                                          		3278699
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 4088954
<SALES>                                                 	2535190
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          			2535190
<CGS>                                                     	1529072
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  			1529072
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           			0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             			0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       				11135
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            			152487
<INCOME-TAX>                                    		45500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    				106987
<DISCONTINUED>                                 			0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             			0
<CHANGES>                                           		 0
<NET-INCOME>                                      		106987
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     		.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     		 .02
        

</TABLE>
#### §§ 16.105-16.106 [Reserved]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6480

JOHN WAYNE LUNSFORD,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JOHN J. LAMANNA, Warden of FCI-Edgefield;

UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Beaufort. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief

District Judge. (9:06-cv-02395-JFA)

Submitted: September 26, 2007 Decided: October 4, 2007

Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Wayne Lunsford, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier Bowens,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

John Wayne Lunsford seeks to challenge on appeal the

authority of a United States magistrate judge to conduct a motion

hearing. The underlying case in which the hearing was scheduled

remains pending in the district court. 

This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and

collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b);

Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The

proceeding Lunsford seeks to challenge reflects neither a final

order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order.

Accordingly, we deny Lunsford’s motion for appointment of counsel

and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### § 17.264 Recoupments and releases.

In any case where the Department of Veterans Affairs or a grantee's obligations under an exchange of information agreement implemented by grant funds are terminated, or where grant-financed equipment or facilities cease to be used for the purposes for which grant support was given, or when grant-financed property is transferred, the grantee shall return the proportionate value of such equipment or facility as was financed by the grant. When it is determined the Department of Veterans Affairs equitable interest is greater that proportionate value, then a claim in such greater amount shall be asserted. If it is determined an amount less than proportionate value or less than the Department of Veterans Affairs equitable interest should be recouped, or that the Department of Veterans Affairs should execute any releases, then a proposal concerning such a settlement or releases complete with explanations and justifications shall be submitted to the Assistant Chief Medical Director for Academic Affairs for a final determination.

[42 FR 54805, Oct. 11, 1977. Redesignated at 61 FR 21966, May 13, 1996]
#### § 14.809 Demands or requests in legal proceedings for records protected by confidentiality statutes.

In addition to complying with the requirements of §§ 14.800 through 14.810, requests or demands in legal proceedings for the production of records, or for testimony of VA employees concerning information, protected by the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, or other confidentiality statutes, such as 38 U.S.C. 5701, 5705 and 7332, must satisfy the requirements for disclosure imposed by those statutes, and implementing regulations, such as 38 CFR 1.511, before the records may be provided or testimony given. Accordingly, the responsible VA official may first determine whether there is legal authority to provide the testimony or records sought under applicable confidentiality statutes before applying §§ 14.800 through 14.810. Where an applicable confidentiality statute mandates disclosure, §§ 14.800 through 14.810 will not apply.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501 (a) and (b); 5 U.S.C. 301)
Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18U.S.C. Section 1350

	The certification set forth below is being submitted to the Securities and ExchangeCommission solely for the purpose of complying with Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of theUnited States Code. This certification is not to be deemed filed pursuant to the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934 and does not constitute a part of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterlyperiod ended March 31, 2003 (the "Report:").

	Ann Murtlow, President and Chief Executive Officer and Hamsa Shadaksharappa,Senior Vice President-Financial Services, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of IPALCO Enterprises,Inc. (the Corporation), each certifies that, to the best of his or her knowledge:

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

 

/s/ Ann Murtlow/s/ Hamsa Shadaksharappa   Ann Murtlow   Hamsa Shadaksharappa   President and Chief Executive Officer   Senior Vice President-Financial Services, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary   May 14, 2003   May 14, 2003A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to IPALCO andwill be retained by IPALCO and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 352.2 Timing.

The Copyright Royalty Judges will issue their determination within 11 months of the date of the post-discovery settlement conference or 15 days before the expiration of the existing rates or terms in a proceeding to determine successors to rates or terms that will expire on a specific date, whichever date first occurs. The date the determination is “issued” refers to the date of the order.

[70 FR 30905, May 31, 2005, as amended at 71 FR 53330, Sept. 11, 2006]
§ 17.39 Certain Filipino veterans. ( a ) Any Filipino Commonwealth Army veteran, including one who was recognized by authority of the U.S. Army as belonging to organized Filipino guerilla forces, or any new Philippine Scout is eligible for hospital care, nursing home care, and outpatient medical services within the United States in the same manner and subject to the same terms and conditions as apply to U.S. veterans, if such veteran or scout resides in the United States and is a citizen or lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence. For purposes of these VA health care benefits, the standards described in 38 CFR 3.42(c) will be accepted as proof of U.S. citizenship or lawful permanent residence.
( b ) Commonwealth Army Veterans, including those who were recognized by authority of the U.S. Army as belonging to organized Filipino guerilla forces, and new Philippine Scouts are not eligible for VA health care benefits if they do not meet the residency and citizenship requirements described in § 3.42(c).
(The Office of Management and Budget has approved the information collection requirements in this section under control number 2900-0091) (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 1734)
[71 FR 6680, Feb. 9, 2006]
Skip Links

USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS

Open-File Report 02–136 **Superseded**

About USGS /  Science Topics /  Maps, Products & Publications /  Education / Publication: FAQ

Pubs Warehouse

## Preliminary Geologic Map of the Santa Barbara Coastal Plain Area, Santa Barbara County, California

#### By Scott A. Minor, Karl S. Kellogg, Richard G. Stanley, Paul Stone, Charles L. Powell, II, Larry D. Gurrola, Amy J. Selting and Theodore R. Brandt

| **Abstract**
This report presents a new geologic digital map of the Santa Barbara coastal plain area at a compilation scale of 1:24,000 (one inch on the map = 2,000 feet on the ground) and with a horizontal positional accuracy of at least 20 m.  This preliminary map depicts the distribution of bedrock units and surficial deposits and associated deformation underlying and adjacent to the coastal plain within the contiguous Santa Barbara and Goleta 7.5' quadrangles.  A planned second version will extend the mapping westward into the adjoining Dos Pueblos Canyon quadrangle and eastward into the Carpinteria quadrangle. | Superseded on October 5, 2009

First posted July 2006
-  **SIM 3001**  (This report has been superseded.) |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices                                                                                                                                                                 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey      URL: https://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/of/2002/ofr-02-0136/Questions or Assistance: USGS Web ContactPage Last Modified: Wed Dec  7 19:04 EDT 2016 |  |

----
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 28, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-50710

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GREGORY KENT TUCKER,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. SA-02-CR-396-ALL

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

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gregory Kent Tucker appeals his sentence for travel with

intent to engage in a sexual act with a juvenile, contending

pursuant to United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), that

he was sentenced in violation of the Sixth Amendment. In his

plea agreement, however, Tucker waived his right to appeal his

sentence on any ground, save ineffective assistance of counsel

and prosecutorial misconduct. 
No. 03-50710

-2-

The district court contravened FED. R. CRIM. P. 11(b)(1)(N)

when it failed to advise Tucker that by pleading guilty he was

waiving his right to appeal his sentence. Nevertheless, standing

alone, such an error does not preclude a finding that the waiver

was knowing and voluntary. See United States v. McKinney, 406

F.3d 744, 746 (5th Cir. 2005). The record of Tucker’s

rearraignment indicates that Tucker read and understood his plea

agreement and that he raised no question regarding the waiver-ofappeal provision. He is therefore “held to the bargain to which

he agreed, regardless of whether the court specifically

admonished him concerning the waiver of appeal,” and we are

without jurisdiction to entertain his Sixth Amendment challenge. 

See id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); United

States v. Henderson, 72 F.3d 463, 465 (5th Cir. 1995).

APPEAL DISMISSED.
###### 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.

#### § 1.993 Suspension of concurrent interference and *inter partes* reexamination proceeding.

If a patent in the process of *inter partes* reexamination is or becomes involved in an interference or trial before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, the Director may suspend the *inter partes* reexamination, interference, or trial. The Director will not consider a request to suspend an interference or trial unless a motion under § 41.121(a)(3) of this title to suspend the interference or trial has been presented to, and denied by, an administrative patent judge and the request is filed within ten (10) days of a decision by an administrative patent judge denying the motion for suspension or such other time as the administrative patent judge may set.

[77 FR 46629, Aug. 6, 2012]

###### 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.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 22 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 22

  To make appropriations for military construction and family housing 
 projects for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2007, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2007

Mr. Cole of Oklahoma (for himself, Mr. Hunter, Mr. Hayes, Mr. Franks of 
Arizona, Mrs. Drake, Mr. Miller of Florida, Ms. Fallin, Mr. Bartlett of 
Maryland, Mr. Bishop of Utah, Mr. Lucas, Mr. Wilson of South Carolina, 
 Mr. Gingrey, Mr. Butterfield, Mrs. Miller of Michigan, Mrs. McMorris 
  Rodgers, Mr. McKeon, Mr. Kline of Minnesota, Mr. Boren, Mr. Saxton, 
 Mrs. Jo Ann Davis of Virginia, Mr. Turner, Mr. Davis of Kentucky, and 
 Mr. Jones of North Carolina) introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Appropriations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To make appropriations for military construction and family housing 
 projects for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2007, 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. FUNDING FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION AND FAMILY HOUSING 
              PROJECTS.

    There is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not 
otherwise appropriated, for military construction, family housing, and 
base realignment and closure functions administered by the Department 
of Defense, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, an amount 
equal to the total amounts that were authorized to be appropriated for 
such purposes for such fiscal year under the Military Construction 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (division B of the John Warner 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (Public Law 
109-364)). Amounts appropriated under this section shall only be 
available to the extent amounts have not previously been appropriated 
for such purposes.
                                 <all>
```
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Selected accomplishments[electronic resource]**
 
1999: Apr/Jun | Jul/Sep
2000: Jan/Mar
2001: Jan/Mar | Apr/Jun| Jul/Sep
 
SuDoc Number:EP 1.1/5-2:
Item Number:0431-K-17 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000542057
 
January 24, 2020
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 Bel Fuse Inc (the "Company") on Form
      10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Colin Dunn, Vice President of Finance
      of
      the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
      Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)
      The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented
      and consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods presented.





Dated:
      ________________, 2006











BY: /s/
      Colin Dunn


Colin
      Dunn, Vice President of


Finance