alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 21.8140 Evaluation and improvement of vocational potential. ( a ) *General.* A CP or VRC may use the services that paragraph (d) of this section describes to: ( 1 ) Evaluate vocational training and employment potential;
( 2 ) Provide a basis for planning: ( i ) A program of services and assistance to improve the eligible child's preparation for vocational training and employment; or
( ii ) A vocational training program;
( 3 ) Reevaluate the vocational training feasibility of an eligible child participating in a vocational training program; and
( 4 ) Remediate deficiencies in the child's basic capabilities, skills, or knowledge to give the child the ability to participate in vocational training or employment. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1804(b), 1814)
( b ) *Periods when evaluation and improvement services may be provided.* A CP or VRC may authorize the services described in paragraph (d) of this section, except those in paragraph (d)(4) of this section, for delivery during: ( 1 ) An initial or extended evaluation; or
( 2 ) Pursuit of a vocational training program. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1804(c), 1814)
( c ) *Duration of services.* The duration of services needed to improve vocational training and employment potential, furnished on a full-time basis either as a preliminary part or all of a vocational training program, may not exceed 9 months. If VA furnishes these services on a less than full-time basis, the duration will be for the period necessary, but may not exceed the equivalent of 9 months of full-time training. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1804(c), 1814)
( d ) *Scope of services.* Evaluation and improvement services include: ( 1 ) Diagnostic services;
( 2 ) Personal and work adjustment training;
( 3 ) Referral for medical care and treatment pursuant to §§ 17.900 through 17.905 of this title for the spina bifida, covered birth defects, or related conditions;
( 4 ) Vocationally oriented independent living services indispensable to pursuing a vocational training program;
( 5 ) Language training, speech and voice correction, training in ambulation, and one-hand typewriting;
( 6 ) Orientation, adjustment, mobility and related services; and
( 7 ) Other appropriate services to assist the child in functioning in the proposed training or work environment. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1804(c), 1814)
( e ) *Applicability of chapter 31 rules on special rehabilitation services.* The provisions of § 21.140 do not apply to this subpart. Subject to the provisions of this subpart, the following provisions apply to the vocational training program under this subpart in a manner comparable to that for veterans under the 38 U.S.C. chapter 31 program: § 21.142(a) and (b); § 21.144; § 21.146; § 21.148(a) and (c); § 21.150 other than paragraph (b); § 21.152 other than paragraph (b); § 21.154 other than paragraph (b); and § 21.156.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1804(c), 1814)
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2369 

To extend the authorization of appropriations for the Office of Government 

Ethics through fiscal year 2011. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 17, 2007 

Mr. CHABOT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the 

Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined 

by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 

within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To extend the authorization of appropriations for the Office 

of Government Ethics through fiscal year 2011. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF APPRO4 PRIATIONS FOR OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT 

5 ETHICS. 

6 Section 405 of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 

7 (5 U.S.C. App.) is amended by striking ‘‘fiscal year 2007’’ 

8 and inserting ‘‘each of fiscal years 2008 through 2011’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            Jun-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                 Dec-31-1996
<CASH>                          30,547
<SECURITIES>                 1,058,125
<RECEIVABLES>                   27,987
<ALLOWANCES>                      0
<INVENTORY>                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                67,559
<PP&E>                            0
<DEPRECIATION>                    0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               1,547,037
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           20,932
<BONDS>                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>             0
<PREFERRED>                       0
<COMMON>                        54,000
<OTHER-SE>                        0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 1,547,037
<SALES>                        128,346
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               144,194
<CGS>                             0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>               561,815
<LOSS-PROVISION>                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                0
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (417,621)
<INCOME-TAX>                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               0
<DISCONTINUED>                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                   0
<CHANGES>                         0
<NET-INCOME>                  (417,621)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                    (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                    (0.02)
        

</TABLE>
---

EXHIBIT 31.1

Certification Pursuant to Section
302of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

I, Garry L. Anselmo, certify that:

I have reviewed this quarterly report
on Form 10-QSB of Silverado Gold Mines Ltd;

1. Based on my knowledge, this report
does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
to the period covered by this report;

2. Based on my knowledge, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly
present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;

3. The registrants other certifying
officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure
controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls
and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
Issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the
Issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any
change in the Issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the Issuers fiscal quarter ending September 30, 2005, that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Issuers
internal control over financial reporting.

4. The registrants other certifying
officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal
control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditor and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

(a) All deficiencies and material
weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not
material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant
role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date: July 14, 2006

/s/ Garry L. AnselmoGarry
L. AnselmoPrincipal Executive Officer

---
**Exhibit 31(a)****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a)**I, Gregory B. Kalush, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Interphase Corporation (the “Company”);  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. The Company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Company and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe Company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such an internal controlover financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assuranceregarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements forexternal purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the Company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Company’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and 5. The Company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Company’s auditors and theaudit committee of the Company’s board of directors:(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Company’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.       Date: August 10, 2007 Signature: /s/ Gregory B. Kalush             Chief Executive Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7235
IN RE: CORNELIUS TUCKER, JR.,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-02-235-5) Submitted: November 18, 2004 Decided: November 30, 2004 Before LUTTIG and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cornelius Tucker, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Cornelius Tucker, Jr., faces pending charges in the Eastern District of North Carolina. The district court ordered that Tucker be examined to determine his competence to stand trial. Tucker petitions this court for writ of mandamus directing the district court to expedite the examination and order a magnetic resonance imaging scan. Tucker also wants the examination conducted at a federal prison facility rather than a jail. Tucker requests that counsel, his seventh so far in this proceeding, be dismissed and the judge be recused. Mandamus relief is available only when the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought. In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n , 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). Further, mandamus is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary situations. See Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court , 426 U.S. 394, 402 (1976); In re Beard , 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. See In re United Steelworkers , 595 F.2d 958, 960 (4th Cir. 1979). In light of these principles, the relief sought by Tucker is not available through mandamus. To the extent Tucker asserts bias by the district judge, he has not demonstrated extrajudicial bias warranting recusal. Beard , 811 F.2d at 827. Therefore, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for mandamus. We dispense with oral- 3 - argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 247 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 247

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To designate a Forest Service trail at Waldo Lake in the Willamette 
 National Forest in the State of Oregon as a national recreation trail 
        in honor of Jim Weaver, a former Member of the House of 
                            Representatives.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL RECREATIONAL TRAIL, WILLAMETTE 
              NATIONAL FOREST, OREGON, IN HONOR OF JIM WEAVER, A FORMER 
              MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

    (a) Designation.--Forest Service trail number 3590 in the 
Willamette National Forest in Lane County, Oregon, which is a 19.6 mile 
trail that begins and ends at North Waldo Campground and 
circumnavigates Waldo Lake, is hereby designated as a national 
recreation trail under section 4 of the National Trails System Act (16 
U.S.C. 1243) and shall be known as the ``Jim Weaver Loop Trail''.
    (b) Interpretive Sign.--Using funds available for the Forest 
Service, the Secretary of Agriculture shall prepare, install, and 
maintain an appropriate sign at the trailhead of the Jim Weaver Loop 
Trail to indicate the name of the trail and to provide information 
regarding the life and career of Congressman Jim Weaver.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 5, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 247

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To designate a Forest Service trail at Waldo Lake in the Willamette 
 National Forest in the State of Oregon as a national recreation trail 
        in honor of Jim Weaver, a former Member of the House of 
                            Representatives.
```
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 13

- 00192

- CR

RACHEL ELAINE BRADLEY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 124th District Court

Gregg County, Texas

Trial Court No. 41,409

- B

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Carter2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION

Rachel Elaine Bradley has filed a motion stating that she wishes to dismiss her appeal

.

The motion was signed by Bradley and her counsel. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate

Procedure 42.2(a), her motion is granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P 42.2(a).

We dismiss t h is appeal.

Jack Cart er

Justice

Date Submitted: November 25 , 2013

Date Decided: November 26 , 2013

Do Not Publish
#### Campbell *v.*The State.

*Disturbing Religious Worship.*

(Decided Feb. 6, 1912.

58 South. 125.)

*Indictment and Information; Statute; Designating Place of Offense.*— An indictment which follows the Code form and charges that the defendant while druuk did appear in a public place, to-wit, a church, where one or more persons were present, in his drunken condition, etc., is not demurrable because it does hot allege at what spcifie church the offense was committed.

Appeal from Madison Law and Equity Court.

Heard before Hon. J. H. Ballentine.

' Bruce Campbell was convicted of boisterous and indecent conduct in a church, while in an intoxicated condition, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Douglass Taylor, and C. P. Grimmett, for appellant.

No brief came to the Reporter.

R. C. Brigkell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

The demurrer to the indictment was properly overruled.- — - *Roden v. The State,*136 Ala. 89; *State v. Moriarty,*74 Ind. 103; *State v. Brown,*38 Kan. 390.

de GRAFFENRIED, J.

The indictment in this case charges that the defendant, “while intoxicated or drunk, did appear in a public place, to-wit a church, where one or more persons were present, and manifested his drunken condition by boisterous and indecent conduct or loud and profane discourse, against the peace and dignity of the state,” etc.

The defendant demurred to the indictment, because it did not allege at what specific church the defendant *105appeared in a state of drunkenness or intoxication. The indictment follows the language of the form prescribed by the Code, and was not subject to the defendant’s de*murrer.*—Murrell *v. State,*44 Ala. 367; *Holly v. State,*54 Ala. 238; *Fesson v. State,*26 Ala. 76; *Elam v. State,*25 Ala. 52; 1 Mayfield’s Dig., p. 431, § 185.

The court did not err in overruling the demurrer to the indictment. The judgment of the court below is affirmed.

Affirmed.
§ 48.200 What must I do to comply with this part? There are two general requirements if you are a recipient other than an individual. ( a ) First, you must make a good faith effort, on a continuing basis, to maintain a drug-free workplace. You must agree to do so as a condition for receiving any award covered by this part. The specific measures that you must take in this regard are described in more detail in subsequent sections of this subpart. Briefly, those measures are to— ( 1 ) Publish a drug-free workplace statement and establish a drug-free awareness program for your employees (see §§ 48.205 through 48.220); and
( 2 ) Take actions concerning employees who are convicted of violating drug statutes in the workplace (see § 48.225).
( b ) Second, you must identify all known workplaces under your Federal awards (see § 48.230).
Editorial Note on Part 3
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3 appear at 61 FR 7216, Feb. 27, 1996; 62 FR 35970, July 3, 1997; 62 FR 47532, Sept. 9, 1997; and 67 FR 46868, July 17, 2002.

§ 3.53 Continuous cohabitation. ( a ) *General.* The requirement that there must be continuous cohabitation from the date of marriage to the date of death of the veteran will be considered as having been met when the evidence shows that any separation was due to the misconduct of, or procured by, the veteran without the fault of the surviving spouse. Temporary separations which ordinarily occur, including those caused for the time being through fault of either party, will not break the continuity of the cohabitation.
( b ) *Findings of fact.* The statement of the surviving spouse as to the reason for the separation will be accepted in the absence of contradictory information. If the evidence establishes that the separation was by mutual consent and that the parties lived apart for purposes of convenience, health, business, or any other reason which did not show an intent on the part of the surviving spouse to desert the veteran, the continuity of the cohabitation will not be considered as having been broken. State laws will not control in determining questions of desertion; however, due weight will be given to findings of fact in court decisions made during the life of the veteran on issues subsequently involved in the application of this section.
[41 FR 18300, May 3, 1976, as amended at 59 FR 32659, June 24, 1994]
Editorial Note on Part 84
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 84 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

§ 84.11 Contents of application. ( a ) Each application for approval shall contain a complete written description of the respirator for which approval is requested together with drawings and specifications (and lists thereof) showing full details of construction of the respirator and of the materials used.
( b ) Drawings shall be titled, numbered, and dated; any revision dates shall be shown on the drawings, and the purpose of each revision being sought shall be shown on the drawing or described on an attachment to the drawing to which it applies.
( c ) Each application for approval shall contain a proposed plan for quality control which meets the minimum requirements set forth in subpart E of this part.
( d ) Each application shall contain a statement that the respirator has been pretested by the applicant as prescribed in § 84.64, and shall include the results of such tests.
( e ) Each application for approval shall contain a statement that the respirator and component parts submitted for approval are either prototypes, or made on regular production tooling, with no operation included which will not be incorporated in regular production processing.
(The information collections contained in this section are approved under OMB control number 0920-0109)