alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1239.30 Bank member products policy. ( a ) *Adoption and review of member products policy* — ( 1 ) *Adoption.* Each Bank's board of directors shall have in effect at all times a policy that addresses the Bank's management of products offered by the Bank to members and housing associates, including but not limited to advances, standby letters of credit, and acquired member assets, consistent with the requirements of the Bank Act, paragraph (b) of this section, and all applicable FHFA regulations and policies.
( 2 ) *Review and compliance.* Each Bank's board of directors shall: ( i ) Review the Bank's member products policy annually;
( ii ) Amend the member products policy as appropriate; and
( iii ) Re-adopt the member products policy, including interim amendments, not less often than every three years.
( b ) *Member products policy requirements.* In addition to meeting any other requirements set forth in this chapter, each Bank's member products policy shall: ( 1 ) Address credit underwriting criteria to be applied in evaluating applications for advances, standby letters of credit, and renewals;
( 2 ) Address appropriate levels of collateralization, valuation of collateral and discounts applied to collateral values for advances and standby letters of credit;
( 3 ) Address advances-related fees to be charged by each Bank, including any schedules or formulas pertaining to such fees;
( 4 ) Address standards and criteria for pricing member products, including differential pricing of advances pursuant to § 1266.5(b)(2) of this chapter, and criteria regarding the pricing of standby letters of credit, including any special pricing provisions for standby letters of credit that facilitate the financing of projects that are eligible for any of the Banks' CICA programs under part 1292 of this chapter;
( 5 ) Provide that, for any draw made by a beneficiary under a standby letter of credit, the member will be charged a processing fee calculated in accordance with the requirements of § 1271.6(b) of this chapter;
( 6 ) Address the maintenance of appropriate systems, procedures, and internal controls; and
( 7 ) Address the maintenance of appropriate operational and personnel capacity.
§ 1282.13 Multifamily special affordable housing goal and subgoals. ( a ) *Multifamily housing goal and subgoals.* An Enterprise shall be in compliance with a multifamily housing goal or subgoal if its performance under the housing goal or subgoal meets or exceeds the benchmark level for the goal or subgoal, respectively.
( b ) *Multifamily low-income housing goal.* The percentage share of dwelling units in multifamily residential housing financed by mortgages purchased by each Enterprise that consists of dwelling units affordable to low-income families shall meet or exceed 61 percent of the total number of dwelling units in multifamily residential housing financed by mortgages purchased by the Enterprise in each year for 2023 and 2024.
( c ) *Multifamily very low-income housing subgoal.* The percentage share of dwelling units in multifamily residential housing financed by mortgages purchased by each Enterprise that consists of dwelling units affordable to very low-income families shall meet or exceed 12 percent of the total number of dwelling units in multifamily residential housing financed by mortgages purchased by the Enterprise in each year for 2023 and 2024.
( d ) *Small multifamily low-income housing subgoal.* The percentage share of dwelling units in small multifamily properties financed by mortgages purchased by each Enterprise that consists of dwelling units affordable to low-income families shall meet or exceed 2.5 percent of the total number of dwelling units in all multifamily residential housing financed by mortgages purchased by the Enterprise in each year for 2023 and 2024.
[83 FR 5899, Feb. 12, 2018, as amended at 85 FR 82896, Dec. 21, 2020; 86 FR 73658, Dec. 28, 2022; 87 FR 78846, Dec. 23, 2022]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              JUL-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         275,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,000
<INVENTORY>                                     59,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               355,000
<PP&E>                                          16,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 371,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          110,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     261,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   371,000
<SALES>                                        455,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                          225,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  486,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 5,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (273,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (273,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-1858-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2008-0018]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Georgia (FEMA-1858-DR), dated September 24, 2009, and related determinations.

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         September 25, 2009.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Georgia is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of September 24, 2009.

Catoosa, DeKalb, Fulton, Gwinnett, Newton and Rockdale Counties for Individual Assistance.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

W. Craig Fugate,

Administrator,  Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. E9-23958 Filed 10-2-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
Exhibit 32.1


              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                 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  IGENE  Biotechnology,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for  the  period  ended
June  30,  2008,  as  filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission  (the "Report"), I, Stephen F. Hiu, President  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,
to the best of my knowledge:

          (1). The Report fully complies with the requirements of
          Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange  Act
          of 1934, as amended; and

          (2).  The  information contained in the  Report  fairly
          presents,  in  all  material  respects,  the  financial
          condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: August 7, 2008                    By:  /S/ STEPHEN F. HIU
                                             ____________________
                                                 STEPHEN F. HIU
                                                 President


A  signed original of this written statement required by  Section
906  has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the
Company  and furnished to the Securities and Exchange  Commission
or its staff upon request.
#### § 1208.66 Hearing official.

A hearing official may be any qualified individual, as determined by FHFA, including an administrative law judge.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 1 9

- 1985

_____________________________ J.C., Father of J.K.C., J.J.E.C., J.A.C., and J.I.C., Minor Children
, Appellant,

v.

D EPARTMENT OF C HILDREN AND F AMILIES , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County

. Mary Polson , Judge

. September 5, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
W OLF , R OBERTS , and R OWE , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Ryan Thomas Truskoski of Ryan Thomas Truskoski, P.A., Orlando
, for Appellant.

Sarah J. Rum ph, Appellate Counsel, Children’s Legal Services, Department of Children and Families, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 02-3661

___________ Hector Hinojosa Aguilar, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review of an v. * Order of the Board of * Immigration Appeals. John Ashcroft, et al., * * [UNPUBLISHED] * Respondents. *

___________ Submitted: December 19, 2003 Filed: January 26, 2004

___________ Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Hector Hinojosa Aguilar is a native of Mexico who entered the United States without inspection in 1987. In December 1991, Hinojosa Aguilar returned to Mexico and attempted to reenter the United States the same day. Immigration officers stopped Hinojosa Aguilar and forced him to return to Mexico. He illegally reentered the United States the next day. The INS commenced deportation proceedings in 1995. Hinojosa Aguilar conceded deportability and requested suspension of deportation. After a hearing, the immigration judge concluded that Hinojosa Aguilar is not eligible for that relief because he failed to maintain a conti nuous physical-2- presence in the United States for more than seven years before the INS issued its order to show cause. The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed Hinojosa Aguilar’s administrative appeal, and he now petitions this court for review of the BIA’s final agency action. This deportation proceeding was pending when Congress enacted the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”), Pub. L. No. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009 (1996). While retaining the continuous physical presence principle from prior law, Congress added the rule that an alien has not maintained continuous physical presence “if the alien has departed from the United States for any period in excess of 90 days.” 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(2). Under IIRIRA’s transitional rules, this new rule applies to Hinojosa Aguilar’s deportation proceeding. He argues that he is eligible for suspension of deportation under the statute as amended by § 1229b(d)(2) because his voluntary return to Mexico in December 1991 was for less than ninety days and therefore was not a break in his continuous physical presence in this country for more than seven years. The BIA disagreed, concluding in this and similar cases that (i) § 1229b(d)(2) was not intended to define the only means by which continuous physical presence may be broken, and (ii) an alien’s voluntary departure under a threat of deportation pro ceedings interrupts the alien’s continuous physical presence in this country. Agreeing with the Fifth and Ninth Circuits, this court recently held that the BIA’s interpretation of § 1229b(d)(2) is a reasonable construction of the statute that is within the Attorney General’s substantial discretion in granting relief such as a suspension of deportation. Palomino v. Ashcroft , No. 02-3961, 2004 WL 63404, at *3 (8th Cir. Jan. 15, 2004). Palomino controls the issue raised in this case. Accordingly, the decision of the BIA is affirmed.

______________________________
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 91-8586 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MODESTO SERNA SANCHEZ, JR., also known as Number 6,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

(W-90-CR-121)

January 28, 1999
Before KING, Chief Judge, GARWOOD and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *
Modesto Serna Sanchez, Jr. appeals from the district court’s

denial of his request for the production of notes prepared by

federal agents who debriefed several plea-bargaining codefendants.

San chez argues that the district court erred by determining that

the debriefing notes prepared by the go vernment agents contained2

neither Brady nor Jencks Act material. We have reviewed the record

and find no reversible error. Any error committed by the district

court in determining that the debriefing notes were not Jencks Act

material is harmless. S ee United States v. Hodgkiss
, 116 F.3d 116,

118 (5th Cir. 1997). Further, Sanchez has failed to show that the

notes contained any material fa vorable to him under B rady

. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
#### Matter of the Petition of George W. Washburn, for an Order Revoking and Cancelling Liquor Tax Certificate, No. 22,671, Issued to Pasquale Della Morte.

(County Court, Ulster County,

July, 1900.)

Liquor Tax Law — Revocation — Stay on appeal not permissible.

Where proceedings, taken to revoke a liquor tax certificate for the falsity of material statements contained in the application therefor, have resulted in an order of revocation and the same has been entered and served, the court has no power to grant a stay of proceedings pending an appeal from the order.

Proceedings under the Liquor Tax Law, section 28.

Motion by defendant for a stay upon an appeal.

Charles F. Cantine, for petitioner.

Brinnier *&*Searing, for defendant.

William E. Schenck, for Ulster County Treasurer.

Van Etten, J.

An order was made in the above entitled proceeding revoking and cancelling the liquor tax certificate issued to Pasquale Della Morte on the ground that the consents of property owners had not been obtained as required by section 17 of the Liquor Tax Law.

It appeared upon the hearing that there were two houses occupied exclusively as dwellings within two hundred feet of the saloon where liquor was sold under said certificate, and that the consents of the owners of said dwellings had not been obtained. In the application for said certificate said defendant 'stated that there were no houses within two hundred feet of said saloon. This was false. The Liquor Tax Law (§ 23), provides that proceedings may be taken to revoke and cancel the certificate, among other things, “if the consents required by section 17 are not properly filed as required by said section.” It further provides that if the evidence establishes such facts, an order shall be granted revoking and cancelling the certificate, and “ said order *shall*also provide that the holder of said liquor tax certificate, or any other person having such certificate in his possession or under *304his control, *shall forthwith*surrender said certificate to the officer who issued the same, or his successor in office.” Also that' all the rights of the holder of said certificate shall cease upon the filing and service of said order, and that the said certificate shall be *immediately*surrendered to the officer who issued the same.

This proceeding is of a summary nature, and is intended to immediately stop persons from selling liquor who have not the lawful right to do so.

A stay of proceedings after entry and service of the order is not contemplated by said act.

It was held in Matter of Auerbach to Revoke and Cancel Liquor Tax Certificate Issued to Johannsen, 31 Misc. Rep. 46, that “ the order is self-executing, and upon its entry and due service the rights of the holder by virtue of the certificate 'shall cease.’ Therefore, a stay, operating only upon future proceedings, cannot affect the legal status of the party as already fixed by law, and, with or without a stay, his further acts under the certificate would be in violation of the penal provisions of the statute.”

The application for a stay is, therefore, denied.

Application denied.
Shane Young Facility Manager UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105

November 22, 2013 In Reply Refer To:

Sierra Pacific Industries

- Anderson Division 19758 Riverside Avenue Anderson, CA 96007 AIR-3 SAC 12-01

Subject: Extension ofPublic- CommentPeriod for the Proposed PSD Permit for Sierra Pacific Industries - Anderson Division DearMr. Young: This letter is 

### inregard to your application for a Clean Air Act Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration (PSD) air quality permit to construct and operate a new cogenerationunit and ancillary equipment at Sierra Pacific Industries' existing lumber manufacturing facility in Anderson, California. On November 8, 2013, the Region 9 Office ofU.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that we would accept. public comments on ourproposed action onyour application through December 13, 2013. We subsequently received a request from a member ofthe public that we extend the public comment period. In response, we have decided to extend the public commentperiod to January 10, 2014. A public notice announcing the extension ofthe public comment period on the proposed permit will be published 

### inthe ReddingRecordSearchlight onNovember 22, 2013. The date ofthe public hearing scheduled for December 10, 2013 has not changed. In addition, the proposed PSD permit and all related documents remainunchanged from the versions we issued for public comment onNovember 8, 2013. These documents and other supporting information remain available through the EPA Region 9 website at http://www.epa.gov/region09/air/permit/r9-permits-issued

.html, which will also announce the extended public comment period. lfyou have any questions, you may contact me at (415) 972-3974 orrios.gerardo@epa.gov, or Shaheerah Kelly at (415) 947-4156 orkelly.shaheerah@epa.gov.

# ~ Gerardo C. Rios Chief, Permits Office Air Division

### cc: Eric Albright, ENVIRON International Corporation Ross Bell, Shasta CountyAir 

### Quality Management District John Waldrop, Shasta County Air 

### Quality Management District Robert Fletcher, California Air 

### Resources Board
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

_________________________________________

)

HABTAMU DANIEL, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 10-0345 (EGS)

)

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, )

)

Defendant. )

_________________________________________ )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On November 2, 2010, defendant filed a motion to dismiss. In its November 3, 2010

Order, the Court advised plaintiff, among other things, of his obligation to file an opposition or

other response to the motion. Further, the Order expressly warned plaintiff that, if he failed to

file his opposition by December 3, 2010, the Court would treat the motion as conceded. To date,

plaintiff neither has filed an opposition nor has requested additional time to do so. Accordingly,

the Court treats defendants’ motion as conceded.

An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

SIGNED: EMMET G. SULLIVAN

United States District Judge

DATED: December 10, 2010
§ 1227.10 Exception to final suspension order in effect. ( a ) *Request for exception.* A regulated entity to which a final suspension order in effect is applicable may request an exception from such order to allow it to engage in a particular covered transaction with a suspended person and any affiliates thereof. Any such request shall clearly state any reasons supporting an exception, as well as any steps the regulated entity will take to mitigate any risks presented by the exception. An exception may not be requested by a suspended person or any affiliates thereof.
( b ) *Decision on exception.* A suspending official may approve an exception from a final suspension order in effect to permit a regulated entity to engage in a particular covered transaction with a suspended person and any affiliates thereof for reasons consistent with those for which the suspending official may limit or qualify the scope or effect of a final suspension order under § 1227.6(f)(2)(iv) of this part. The decision on a request for an exception shall not constitute an appealable order.
( c ) *Notice required.* FHFA shall provide written notice in a timely manner to the regulated entity, the suspended person and any affiliates thereof, and the other regulated entities of any exception approved for a particular covered transaction.