alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 1777.3 Definitions. For purposes of this part, the following definitions will apply: *1992 Act* means the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act, 12 U.S.C. 4501 *et seq.*
*Affiliate* means an entity that controls an Enterprise, is controlled by an Enterprise, or is under common control with an Enterprise.
*Capital distribution* means: ( 1 ) Any dividend or other distribution in cash or in kind made with respect to any shares of, or other ownership interest in, an Enterprise, except a dividend consisting only of shares of the Enterprise; and
( 2 ) Any payment made by an Enterprise to repurchase, redeem, retire, or otherwise acquire any of its shares or other ownership interests, including any extension of credit made to finance an acquisition by the Enterprise of such shares or other ownership interests, except to the extent the Enterprise makes a payment to repurchase its shares for the purpose of fulfilling an obligation of the Enterprise under an employee stock ownership plan that is qualified under section 401 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 401 *et seq.*) or any substantially equivalent plan as determined by the Director of OFHEO in writing in advance.
*Core capital* has the same meaning as provided in 12 CFR 1750.2.
*Critical capital level* means the amount of core capital that is equal to the sum of one half of the amount determined under 12 CFR 1750.4(a)(1) and five-ninths of the amounts determined under 12 CFR 1750.4(a)(2) through 1750.4(a)(7).
*Enterprise* means the Federal National Mortgage Association and any affiliate thereof, and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and any affiliate thereof.
*Minimum capital level* means the minimum amount of core capital specified for an Enterprise pursuant to section 1362 of the 1992 Act (12 U.S.C. 4612), as determined under 12 CFR 1750.4.
*OFHEO* means the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.
*Risk-based capital level* means the amount of total capital specified for an Enterprise pursuant to section 1361 of the 1992 Act (12 U.S.C. 4611), as determined under OFHEO's regulations implementing section 1361.
*Total capital* has the same meaning as provided at 12 CFR 1750.11(n).
§ 192.460 Initial balance of liquidation sub-account. ( a ) *General rule.* ( 1 ) A savings association must calculate the initial liquidation sub-account balance of each eligible and supplemental eligible account holder at the time of the conversion.
( 2 ) The initial liquidation sub-account balance for a savings account held by an eligible account holder, for a savings account not held by the eligible account holder on the supplemental eligibility record date, is calculated by multiplying the initial liquidation account balance by the following fraction: The numerator is the qualifying deposit in the savings account on the eligibility record date and the denominator is the calculation in paragraph (a)(5) of this section.
( 3 ) The initial liquidation sub-account balance for a savings account held by a supplemental eligible account holder, for a savings account not held by the supplemental eligible account holder on the eligibility record date, is calculated by multiplying the initial liquidation account balance by the following fraction: The numerator is the qualifying deposit in the savings account on the supplemental eligibility record date and the denominator is the calculation in paragraph (a)(5) of this section.
( 4 ) For a savings account held on both the eligibility record date and the supplemental eligibility record date, the amount of the qualifying deposit for calculating the initial liquidation sub-account is the higher account balance of the savings account on either the eligibility record date or the supplemental eligibility record date. The initial liquidation sub-account balance is calculated by multiplying the liquidation account balance by the following fraction: The numerator is the higher amount of the qualifying deposit in the savings account on either the eligibility record date or the supplemental eligibility record date and the denominator is the calculation in paragraph (a)(5) of this section.
( 5 ) The denominator for calculating the initial liquidation sub-account balance of each eligible and supplemental eligible account holder is the sum of the numerator calculations in paragraphs (a)(2) through (4) of this section.
( b ) *Balance increases and decreases.* A savings association must not increase the initial liquidation and sub-account balances. It must decrease the initial liquidation account and the sub-account balances under § 192.470 as depositors reduce or close their savings accounts.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2739 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2739

 To amend title 10, United States Code, relating to payment of mental 
                    health counselors under TRICARE.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 15, 2007

  Mr. Hayes introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 10, United States Code, relating to payment of mental 
                    health counselors under TRICARE.

    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 ``TRICARE Mental Health Services 
Enhancement Act''.

SEC. 2. REIMBURSEMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELORS UNDER TRICARE.

    (a)  Reimbursement Under TRICARE.--Section 1079(a)(8) of title 10, 
United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``or licensed or certified mental health 
        counselors'' after ``certified marriage and family therapists'' 
        both places it appears; and
            (2) by inserting ``or licensed or certified mental health 
        counselors'' after ``that the therapists.''
    (b) Authority To Provide Mental Health Services in Clinical 
Trials.--Section 1079(a)(13) of such title is amended by inserting ``, 
licensed or certified mental health counselor,'' after ``certified 
marriage and family therapist''.

SEC. 3. SERVICES OF MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELORS.

    (a) Authority To Enter Into Personal Services Contracts.--Section 
704(c)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
1995 (Public Law 103-337; 108 Stat. 2799; 10 U.S.C. 1091 note) is 
amended by inserting ``mental health counselors,'' after 
``psychologists,''.
    (b) Applicability of Licensure Requirement for Health-Care 
Professionals.--Section 1094 (e)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting ``mental health counselor,'' after 
``psychologist,''.
                                 <all>
```
December 30, 2015 STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN SUPREME COURT A13-2305
Inre Petition for Disciplinary Action against Lynne A. Torgerson, a Minnesota Attorney, RegistrationNo. 208322.
ORDER 

# fiL**m~-=•** API'B.IA IECCJUtH

Byopinion filed on October 21, 2015, the court suspended respondent Lynne A. Torgerson from the practice oflaw for a minimum of60 days, effective 14 days from the date ofthe filing ofthe opinion. Respondent has filed an affidavit seeking reinstatement in which she states that she has fully complied with the terms ofthe suspension order, except for successful completion ofthe professional responsibility portion ofthe state bar examination. The Director ofthe
. Office ofLawyers Professional Responsibility does not oppose the request. Based upon all the files, records, andproceedings herein, ITIS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Respondent Lynne A. Torgerson is conditionally reinstatedto the practice of law, effective as of January 3, 2016, andplacedonprobationfor a periodof2years, subject to the following terms and conditions: (a) Respondent shall cooperate fully with the Director's Office in its efforts to monitor compliance with this probation. Respondent shall promptly respond to the Director's correspondence by its due date. Respondent shall provide the Director with a current mailing address and shall immediately notify the Director ofany change ofaddress. Respondent 1

### shall cooperate with the Director's investigation of any allegations of unprofessional conduct that may come to the Director's attention. Upon the Director's request, respondent shall authorize the release ofinformation and documentation to verify compliance with the terms ofthis probation; and (b) 

### Respondent shall abide by the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct. 2. By October 21, 2016, respondent shall comply with Rule 18(e)(3), Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), by filing with the Clerk ofAppellate Courts and serving upon the Director proof of respondent's successful completion of the professional responsibility portion ofthe state bar examination. Failure to do so shall result in automatic re-suspension pending proof of successful completion of the examination, pursuant to Rule 18(e)(3), RLPR. Dated: December 30,2015

2 

### BY THE COURT:

# ~~d- David R. Stras Associate Justice
UNUM Corporation and Subsidiaries
Form 10-Q
June 30, 1997
<TABLE>
EXHIBIT 12

COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
<CAPTION>
                                        Three Months Ended      Six Months Ended
                                             June 30,                June 30,
                                        ------------------      ----------------
(Unaudited - Dollars in millions)        1997         1996       1997       1996
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                    <C>          <C>        <C>        <C>
Earnings:
 Income from continuing operations
  before income taxes                  $126.4       $106.0     $298.1     $208.7
 Add:  Fixed charges                     13.3         13.2       26.0       26.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earnings as adjusted                   $139.7       $119.2     $324.1     $235.2
================================================================================
Fixed charges:
   Interest expense                     $10.6       $ 10.4     $ 20.8     $ 20.7
   Interest portion of rent expense       2.7          2.8        5.2        5.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total fixed charges                     $13.3       $ 13.2     $ 26.0     $ 26.5
================================================================================

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges       10.5          9.0       12.5        8.9
================================================================================
</TABLE>

For purposes of computing the ratio of earnings to fixed charges, earnings
as adjusted consist of income from continuing operations before income taxes
and fixed charges.  Fixed charges consist of interest expense and the
estimated interest portion of rent expense.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7754

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JOHN MICHAEL WILLIAMS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District

Judge. (CR-95-206, CA-98-1372-AM)

Submitted: February 11, 1999 Decided: February 25, 1999

Before ERVIN, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Michael Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas More Hollenhorst,

Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, For

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on

October 20, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was

entered on the docket sheet on October 21, 1998. It is this date

that we take as the effective date of the court’s decision. See

Fed. R. Civ. P. 58, 79(a); Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35

(4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

John Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.

1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. See United States v. Williams,

No. CA-98-1372-AM (E.D. Va. Oct. 21, 1998).* We decline to review

the claims brought for the first time in this appeal. See Muth v.

United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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
Editorial Note on Part 1266
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1266 appear at 75 FR 76622, Dec. 9, 2010.

§ 1266.12 Intradistrict transfer of advances. ( a ) *Advances held by members.* A Bank may allow one of its members to assume an advance extended by the Bank to another of its members, provided the assumption complies with the requirements of this part governing the issuance of new advances. A Bank may charge an appropriate fee for processing the transfer.
( b ) *Advances held by nonmembers.* A Bank may allow one of its members to assume an advance held by a nonmember, provided the advance was originated by the Bank and provided the assumption complies with the requirements of this part governing the issuance of new advances. A Bank may charge an appropriate fee for processing the transfer.
[59 FR 2950, Jan. 20, 1994. Redesignated at 65 FR 44430, July 18, 2000]
STATE OF LOUISIANA 1 

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

STATE OF LOUISIANA 

VERSUS 

NO. 2022 KW 1251 

DONALD BOYLE JANUARY 17, 2023 

In Re: Donald Boyle, applying for supervisory 

Judicial District Court, Parish of St. 

0400-F-2019. 

BEFORE: THERIOT, CHUTZ, AND HESTER, JJ. 

WRIT DENIED. 

COURT OF APPEAL, 

~.sJ 

DEPUTY CLERK 

FOR THE 

FIRST CIRCUIT 

OF COURT 

COURT 

MRT 

WRC 

CHH 

writs, 

Tammany, 

22nd 

No.
# C_2022398EN.01000203.xml

| 17.10.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.10.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/2

---

Election of the Vice-President of the General Court

(2022/C 398/04)

Meeting on 16 September 2022, the Judges of the General Court, in accordance with Article 9(4) of the Rules of Procedure, elected Mr Savvas Papasavvas Vice-President of the General Court for the period from 16 September 2022 to 31 August 2025.

---
42288.

#### BOGLE v. ATLANTIC MILLS et al.

Argued September 7, 1966

Decided September 28, 1966

Rehearing denied October 26, 1966.

*Endicott & Endicott, Lucian J. Endicott,*for appellant.

*Peek, Whaley & Blackburn, Benjamin B. Blackburn, III, Glenville Haldi,*for appellees.

Per Curiam

: Where, as here, only the action, and not the *cause*of action, is joint, the continued prosecution of the case through verdict and judgment against only one of several defendants after the elimination of the other defendants by directed verdicts, constitutes an election to prosecute the action severally and an abandonment of the joint action. Thus an enumeration of error to this court complaining only of the direction of the verdicts presents no question for decision. *Allen v. Arthurs,*106 Ga. App. 682, 683 (3) (127 SE2d 819); *Hodges v. Seaboard Loan &c.*Assoc., 188 Ga. 410, 411 (1) (3 SE2d 677).

The appellees’ motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is *Dismissed.*

*Bell, P. J., Jordan and Eberhardt, JJ., concur.*
**EPA ICR No. 2487**  **. 01**  **; OMB Control No. 2070 -**  **NEW**

**ATTACHMENT F**  **Survey for EPA Design for the Environment (DfE)**  **Post -**  **Launch Awareness Test of New Visual Mark General Adult Population Survey** 

**OMB Control No. 2070**  **- NEW**  **Approval expires XX/XX/XX**  The annual public burden for this collection of information is estimated at 0.17 hours per respo nse for screened respondents, 2 hours for respondents that participate in the focus groups , 0.33 hours per response for pre - launch consumer online survey respondents, and 0.17 hours per response for post - launch online survey respondents . Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460 . Include the OMB control number in any correspond ence . Do not send the completed application to this address.**Survey for EPA Design for the Environment (DfE)**  **Post -**  **Launch Awareness Test of New Visual Mark General Adult Population Survey**  1. Are you familiar with a labeling program implemented b y the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that enables consumers to select products that can help protect the environment and are safer for people, families , and pets ?

- Yes

- No [SKIP to Q3] 2. What is the name of the labeling program? [Open - ended] 3. For 15 ye ars, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has implemented a voluntary labeling program that enables consumers to select products that can help protect the environment and are safer for families and pets . This labeling program, called “Design for the Environment” (DfE), evaluates human health and environmental concerns associated with traditional and alternative chemicals in a variety of products, including commonl y used household cleaning products. P roducts that meet EPA’s DfE Standard for Safer Produc ts are allowed to carry

the DfE label. When you see the DfE label on a product it means the DfE scientific review team has screened each ingredient for potential human health and environmental effects and has determined the product contains only those ingr edients that pose the least concern . The labeling program, previously called the “Design for the Environment” (DfE) Safer Product Labeling Program, recentl y changed its name to [NEW NAME] . Now that you have heard more about the labeling program, do yo u recall hearing or seeing any thing about the EPA’s [NEW NAME] program?

- Yes

- No 4. Have you seen this visual mark on any products you have purchased or seen on store shelves?

- Yes

- No 5. Based on what you now know about the labeling program, how likel y are you to use the EPA’s [NEW NAME] visual mark to help you select a product to purchase?

- Extremely

likely

- Very likel y

- Somewhat likely

- Slightly

likel y **Logo**- Not at all likely
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2859 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2859

Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending 
                          September 30, 2003.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 24, 2003

Mr. Young of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Appropriations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
Making emergency supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending 
                          September 30, 2003.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums 
are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise 
appropriated, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, namely:

                    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

                  EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE

                            Disaster Relief

    For an additional amount for ``Disaster Relief'' for necessary 
expenses in carrying out the functions of the Robert T. Stafford 
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.), 
$983,600,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, That this 
amount is designated by the Congress as an emergency requirement 
pursuant to section 502 of H. Con. Res. 95 (108th Congress), the 
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2004.
    This Act may be cited as the ``Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations for Disaster Relief Act, 2003''.
                                 <all>
```
MEMORANDUM 

DATE: July 23, 2014

TO: Clean Power Plan for Existing Power Plants; Docket Id: OAR–2013-0602

FROM: EPA Region 1

SUBJECT: July 22, 2014, Meeting with New England State Commissioners and Air Directors 

Regarding Proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants

SUMMARY

A meeting was held between EPA and the attendees listed below on July 22, 2014 to 

discuss the proposed Carbon Power Plan for Existing Power Plants. Discussion covered 

applicability, state goals and rate to mass conversions. 

ATTENDEES (all by phone)

Connecticut: Jamieson Sinclair, Roslyn Reeps

Maine: Patricia Aho, Heather Parent, Marc Cone

Massachusetts: Will Space

New Hampshire: Joe Fontaine

Rhode Island: Janet Coit, Doug McVay

Vermont: Elaine O’Grady, David Mears

EPA: Joe Goffman, Cynthia Greene, Dave Conroy, Shutsu Wong, Kate Melanson, Doug Gutro, 

Jenny Noonan, Beth Conlin, Brian Fisher, Christopher Sherry, Dave Risley, David Solomon, 

Debra Dalcher, Joe Bryson, Julia Miller, Kevin Culligan, Matt Clouse, Michael Cohen

Attachment: “140722 list of questions - Region 1 AH call with EPA.docx”
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2872

To make Federal law apply to antique firearms in the same way it applies 

to other firearms. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 24, 2003

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

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To make Federal law apply to antique firearms in the same 

way it applies to other firearms.

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 ‘‘Antique Firearm Safe5 ty Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF EXEMPTIONS FOR ANTIQUE FIRE7 ARMS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 921(a)(3) of title 18, 

9 United States Code, is amended by striking the last sen10 tence. 
2

•HR 2872 IH 

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 

2 922(v)(3)(B) of such title is amended—

3 (1) by adding ‘‘or’’ at the end of clause (i); 

4 (2) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of clause (ii); 

5 and 

6 (3) by striking clause (iii). 

7 (c) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 90 days after the 

8 date of the enactment of this Act, the Attorney General 

9 shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to 

10 administer chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, as 

11 in effect pursuant to the amendments made by this Act.

Æ
#### § 264b.1 Purpose and scope.

These rules govern when Board employees, their spouses, and their dependents may accept and retain gifts and decorations from foreign governments under the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act of 1966, as amended (5 U.S.C. 7342) (“Act”).