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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2440 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2440

        To reauthorize the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 22, 2007

 Mr. Lynch (for himself, Mr. Platts, Mr. Klein of Florida, Mr. Royce, 
  Mr. Carney, and Mrs. Maloney of New York) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To reauthorize the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.

    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 ``FinCEN Reauthorization Act of 
2007''.

SEC. 2. FINDING.

    The Congress finds that the work of the Financial Crimes 
Enforcement Network is essential to safeguard the United States 
financial system and its international affiliates from the abuses of 
financial crime, including terrorist financing, developing weapons of 
mass destruction, and money laundering.

SEC. 3. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE FINANCIAL CRIMES ENFORCEMENT NETWORK.

    Section 310(d)(1) of title 31, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``such sums as may be necessary for fiscal years 2002, 2003, 
2004, and 2005'' and inserting ``not more than $85,844,000 for fiscal 
year 2008, and such sums as may be neccessary for fiscal years 2009, 
2010, 2011, and 2012''.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 66.201 Applicability.

The regulations in this subpart apply to grants under section 487 of the Public Health Service Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 288), to public institutions and to nonprofit private institutions to enable those institutions to make National Research Service Awards to individuals for research and training to undertake research, in programs specified in section 487 of the Act.

[66 FR 29500, May 31, 2001]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM(A) THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF SENTEX SENSING TECHNOLOGY, INC. AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH (B) QUARTERLY REPORT, FILED ON
FORM 10-QSB, FOR THE PERIOD ENDING FEBRUARY 29, 1998.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          NOV-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1998
<CASH>                                       1,279,823
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  929,426
<ALLOWANCES>                                    30,993
<INVENTORY>                                  1,441,284
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,873,851
<PP&E>                                         481,689
<DEPRECIATION>                                 244,927
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,375,989
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        4,034,103
<BONDS>                                        527,750
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,153,489
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,339,353)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,375,989
<SALES>                                      1,350,272
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,367,681
<CGS>                                          707,954
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  707,954
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,104,602
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              52,428
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (497,303)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (497,303)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (497,303)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
        

</TABLE>
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS Appeal of

-- . ) ) FN America, LLC ) ) Under ContractNo. W52H09-05-C-0122 ) APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT:
APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 61692
Phyllis E. Andes, Esq.

Vice President, General Counsel Raymond M. Saunders, Esq.

Army ChiefTrial Attorney MAJ Wayne T. Branom Ill, JA

Trial Attorney ORDER OF DISMISSAL The dispute has been settled. The appeal is dismissed with prejudice. Dated: November 15, 2018

dministrative Judge Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Order ofDismissal ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 61692, Appeal ofFNAmerica, LLC, rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management

          - [LLNVS0100.L51010000.ER0000. LVRWF09F8770; NVN-085077 and NVN- 085801; 09-08807; TAS: 14X5017]

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is reopening the public comment period to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Proposed NextLight Renewable Power, LLC, Silver State North Solar Project and Silver State South Solar Project, to be located in Clark County, Nevada. A notice published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on June 30, 2009 [74 FR 31306] provided for a public comment period ending on July 30, 2009.                    

# DATES:

On publication of this notice an additional 30-day scoping period will open for comments through October 19, 2009. Comments received during the interim time between scoping periods will be accepted.

# ADDRESSES:

Submit comments related to the project by any of the following methods:
      -  E-mail: Nextlight_Primm_NV_SEP@blm.gov .                    
      -  Fax:                          (702) 515-5010, Attn: Gregory Helseth.                    
      -  Mail:                          BLM, Las Vegas Field Office, Attn: Gregory Helseth, 4701 North Torrey Pines Drive, Las Vegas, NV 89130-2301.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Gregory Helseth, Renewable Energy Project Manager, (702) 515-5173; or e-mail                         *Nextlight_Primm_NV_SEP@blm.gov*.                    

(Authority: 43 CFR Part 2800)

Ron Wenker,

State Director, Nevada.

[FR Doc. E9-22434 Filed 9-16-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P
§ 21.7143 Nonduplication of educational assistance. ( a ) *Payments of educational assistance shall not be duplicated.* ( 1 ) Except for receipt of a Montgomery GI Bill—Selected Reserve kicker provided under 10 U.S.C. 16131(i), a veteran is barred from concurrently receiving educational assistance under 38 U.S.C. chapter 30 and— ( i ) 38 U.S.C. chapter 31 (Veteran Readiness and Employment (VR&E));
( ii ) 38 U.S.C. chapter 32 (Post-Vietnam Era Veterans' Educational Assistance);
( iii ) 38 U.S.C. chapter 33 (Post-9/11 GI Bill);
( iv ) 38 U.S.C. chapter 35 (Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance);
( v ) 10 U.S.C. chapter 1606 (Montgomery GI Bill—Selected Reserve);
( vi ) 10 U.S.C. chapter 1607 (Reserve Educational Assistance Program);
( vii ) 10 U.S.C. chapter 106a (Educational Assistance Test Program);
( viii ) Section 903 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act, 1981 (Pub. L. 96-342, 10 U.S.C. 2141 note);
( ix ) The Hostage Relief Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96-449, 5 U.S.C. 5561 note); or
( x ) The Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-399).
( b ) If an individual is eligible for benefits under 38 U.S.C. chapter 30 and one or more of the programs listed in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (a)(1)(x) of this section, he or she must specify under which program he or she is claiming benefits. The individual may choose to receive benefits under another program (other than 38 U.S.C. chapter 33) at any time, but not more than once in a calendar month. The individual may choose to receive benefits under 38 U.S.C. chapter 33 at any time, but not more than once during a certified term, quarter, or semester. (Authority: 10 U.S.C. 16136(b); 38 U.S.C. 3033(a), 3681(b))
( c ) *Nonduplication—Federal program.* Payment of educational assistance is prohibited to an otherwise eligible veteran or servicemember— ( 1 ) For a unit course or courses which are being paid for entirely or partly by the Armed Forces during any period he or she is on active duty;
( 2 ) For a unit course or courses which are being paid for entirely or partly by the Department of Health and Human Services during any period that he or she is on active duty with the Public Health Service; or
( 3 ) For a unit course or courses which are being paid for entirely or partly by the United States under the Government Employees' Training Act.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3034, 3681)
[53 FR 1757, Jan. 22, 1988, as amended at 55 FR 28389, July 11, 1990; 57 FR 15025, Apr. 24, 1992; 58 FR 46867, Sept. 3, 1993; 61 FR 20729, May 8, 1996. Redesignated at 68 FR 35180, June 12, 2003, as amended at 74 FR 14670, Mar. 31, 2009; 87 FR 8744, Feb. 16, 2022]
###### 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.

#### § 42.122 Multiple proceedings and Joinder.

(a) *Multiple proceedings.* Where another matter involving the patent is before the Office, the Board may during the pendency of the *inter partes* review enter any appropriate order regarding the additional matter including providing for the stay, transfer, consolidation, or termination of any such matter.

(b) *Request for joinder.* Joinder may be requested by a patent owner or petitioner. Any request for joinder must be filed, as a motion under § 42.22, no later than one month after the institution date of any *inter partes* review for which joinder is requested. The time period set forth in § 42.101(b) shall not apply when the petition is accompanied by a request for joinder.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2344 

To reiterate the authority of the United States Armed Forces to use riot 

control agents as a legitimate, legal, and non-lethal alternative to the 

use of lethal force under the general rules of engagement in effect 

for contingency operations of the Armed Forces conducted outside of 

the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 16, 2007 

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky (for himself and Mr. MARSHALL) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To reiterate the authority of the United States Armed Forces 

to use riot control agents as a legitimate, legal, and 

non-lethal alternative to the use of lethal force under 

the general rules of engagement in effect for contingency 

operations of the Armed Forces conducted outside of 

the United States. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Save the Lives of 

5 Americans in Close Combat Act of 2007’’. 


jlentini on PRODPC74 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2344 IH

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZED USE OF RIOT CONTROL AGENTS IN 

2 UNITED STATES MILITARY OPERATIONS. 

3 It is the policy of the United States that riot control 

4 agents are not chemical weapons, but rather are legiti5 mate, legal, and non-lethal alternatives to the use of lethal 

6 force, and members of the United States Armed Forces 

7 may use riot control agents under the general rules of en8 gagement in effect for a contingency operation of the 

9 Armed Forces conducted outside of the United States. 

Æ 


jlentini on PRODPC74 with BILLS
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SECTION 

Gold Seal Center, 918 E. Divide Ave. 

NORTH DAKOTA Bismarck, NO 58501-1947 

DEPARTMENT of HEALTH 701.328.5200 (fax) 

www.ndhealth.gov 

March 8, 2012 

Mr. Carl Daly (8P-AR)
 

Chief, Air Programs
 

U.S. EPA, Region 8
 

1595 Wynkoop Street
 

Denver, CO 80202-1129
 

Re: Section 128 Commitment 

Dear Mr. Daly: 

This letter is written to provide a commitment by the North Dakota Department of Health to comply with the 

requirements of Section 128 of the Clean Air Act. The Department will incorporate the following 

requirements of the North Dakota Department of Health's Ethics Policy in the State Implementation Plan for 

the Control of Air Pollution: 

Conflicts ofInterest 

A conflict ofinterest is defined as the conflict between the duties assigned to the employee and the self-interest 

or other interests of the employee. Employees must avoid any interest, influence or relationship that might 

conflict or appear to conflict with the best interests ofthe Department ofHealth or the State ofNorth Dakota, 

or that might affect one's working judgment or loyalty. Employees must avoid any situation in which their 

loyalty may be divided and promptly disclose to their division director any situation where an actual or 

potential conflict may exist. 

If employees have a potential conflict of interest in any program, contract or legal matter involving the 

Department ofHealth or reasonably related to their position with the Department ofHealth, the employees must 

notifY the division director, section chief or supervisor in writing of the potential conflict and the cause of the 

potential conflict and remove themselves from any negotiations, deliberations or decisions involving the 

conflict. 

The SIP revision will be applicable to anyone who approves permits or enforcement actions under North 

Dakota's Implementation of the Federal Clean Air Act. We believe these requirements fultl11 the stipulations 

of Section 128 of the Federal Clean Air Act. The SIP revision will be submitted by May 31, 2013. 

If you have any questions, please contact me. 

r---:~7~ Terry L. O'Clair, P.E.
 

Director
 

Division of Air Quality 

TLO/TB:saj 

xc: Margaret Olson, Ass't. Attorney General 

Environmental Health Division of Division of Division of Division of 

Section Chief's Office Air Quality Municipal Facilities Waste Management Water Quality 

701.328.5150 701.328.5188 701.328.5211 701.328.5166 701.328.5210 

Printed on recycled paper.
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.

§ 3.158 Abandoned claims. ( a ) *General.* Except as provided in § 3.652, where evidence requested in connection with an initial claim or supplemental claim or for the purpose of determining continued entitlement is not furnished within 1 year after the date of request, the claim will be considered abandoned. After the expiration of 1 year, further action will not be taken unless a new claim is received. Should the right to benefits be finally established, pension, compensation, dependency and indemnity compensation, or monetary allowance under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. chapter 18 based on such evidence shall commence not earlier than the date of filing the new claim. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501)
( b ) *Department of Veterans Affairs examinations.* Where the veteran fails without adequate reason to respond to an order to report for Department of Veterans Affairs examination within 1 year from the date of request and payments have been discontinued, the claim for such benefits will be considered abandoned.
( c ) *Disappearance.* Where payments of pension, compensation, dependency and indemnity compensation, or monetary allowance under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. chapter 18 have not been made or have been discontinued because a payee's present whereabouts is unknown, payments will be resumed effective the day following the date of last payment if entitlement is otherwise established, upon receipt of a valid current address.

Cross References:
Periodic certification of continued eligibility. See § 3.652. Failure to report for VA examination. See § 3.655. Disappearance of veteran. See § 3.656. [27 FR 11887, Dec. 1, 1962, as amended at 28 FR 13362, Dec. 10, 1963; 52 FR 43063, Nov. 9, 1987; 62 FR 51278, Sept. 30, 1997; 67 FR 49586, July 31, 2002; 84 FR 169, Jan. 18, 2019]
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 204/2005

of 4 February 2005         

determining to what extent import right applications submitted during the month of January 2005 for live bovine animals weighing between 80 and 300 kg as part of a tariff quota provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1204/2004 may be accepted

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (1),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1204/2004 of 29 June 2004 opening and providing for the administration of a tariff quota for live bovine animals weighing between 80 and 300 kg and originating in Bulgaria or Romania (1 July to 30 June 2005) (2), and in particular Articles 1(4) and 4 thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   All applications for import certificates made in the month of January 2005 pursuant to Article 3(3), second subparagraph, third indent, of Regulation (EC) No 1204/2004 are hereby met in full.

2.   The number of animals referred to in Article 1(3)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 1204/2004 is 66 495.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 5 February 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 4 February 2005.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ            

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

----

(1)OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 21. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 1).

(2)OJ L 230, 30.6.2004, p. 32.

----
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-30505

Summary Calendar

 

CARLA S. SANDERS,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CHARLES C. FOTI, JR., Etc.; ET AL,

Defendants,

RICHARD L. STALDER, Secretary of the

Louisiana Department of Public Safety

and Corrections, in his individual

capacity,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 99-CV-768-T

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

November 28, 2001

Before DeMOSS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Defendant Richard L. Stalder has filed an interlocutory appeal

challenging the magistrate judge’s denial of his qualified immunity

defense to plaintiff Carla Sanders 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit.

Stalder’s defense was raised as a motion to dismiss the complaint

for failing to state a claim upon which relief could be granted,
No. 01-30505

-2-

pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6). Stalder contends that Sanders

has failed to allege a violation of a clearly established

constitutional right because no case law from this circuit states

that the Secretary of the Department of Public Safety and

Corrections can be held liable for a failure to release a prisoner

through an improper time calculation if he is not personally

involved with the calculation. Sanders’s assertion that she was

detained for nineteen days after she should have been released

adequately alleges a claim of false imprisonment, which may be

raised under the Fourth Amendment. See Sanders v. English, 950

F.2d 1152, 1159 (5th Cir. 1992). Her allegations that Stalder was

a decision maker for the Department of Public Safety and

Corrections, that he shut down the division that calculated goodtime credits during an office move, and that he failed to establish

a policy for continuing to calculate accumulated good-time credits

during the shutdown adequately alleges a policy leading to the

constitutional violation, which is sufficient to allege supervisory

liability. Thompkins v. Belt, 828 F.2d 298, 303 (5th Cir. 1987).

Stalder also alleges that Sanders has made conclusional

allegations in her complaint that are unsupported by the record.

He is incorrect; Sanders’s allegations are drawn from the facts she

has set forth in her complaint. This court is required to read

those allegation in a light most favorable to Sanders. See Shipp

v. McMahon, 234 F.3d 907, 911 (5th Cir. 2000). When this is done,

Sanders has alleged a possible valid claim for relief. As a

result, the judgment denying qualified immunity is AFFIRMED.