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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4936 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4936

  To increase the penalty imposed on a sexually violent offender who 
fails to comply with requirements to register or report, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 24, 2000

 Mrs. Myrick introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To increase the penalty imposed on a sexually violent offender who 
fails to comply with requirements to register or report, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Megan's Law Improvement Act of 
2000''.

SEC. 2. INCREASED PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY.

    (a) State Programs.--Section 170101 of the Violent Crime Control 
and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 is amended in subsection (d) by adding 
at the end the following: ``Such penalties shall include a sentence to 
a term of imprisonment--
            ``(1) in the case of a first offense, for not less than 6 
        months and not more than 2 years; and
            ``(2) in the case of a second or subsequent offense, for 
        not less than 3 years and not more than 10 years.''.
    (b) FBI Programs.--Section 170102 of that Act is amended in 
subsection (j) by striking ``probation, shall,'' and all that follows 
through the period at the end and inserting the following: ``probation,
        shall, in the case of a first offense under this subsection, be 
        imprisoned for not less than 6 months and not more than 2 years 
        and, in the case of a second or subsequent offense under this 
        subsection, be imprisoned for not less than 3 years and not 
        more than 10 years.''.

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by section 2 shall take effect on July 1, 2001.
                                 <all>
```
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.                  

###### Environmental Protection Agency

          - 40 CFR Parts 141 and 142
          - [FRL-6715-4]

# AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

# ACTION:

Direct final rule; withdrawal.

# SUMMARY:

Because we received adverse comments, EPA is withdrawing the direct final rule regarding the Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule, the Stage 1 Disinfectant and Disinfection Byproducts Rule, and the Primacy Rule that published on April 14, 2000 (65 FR 20304).

                        In the direct final rule, we stated that if we received adverse comments by May 15, 2000, we would publish a timely withdrawal in the                         **Federal Register**                        . EPA subsequently received adverse comments. We will address those comments in a final rule based                               ( print page 37053)                            upon the proposed rule also published on April 14, 2000 (65 FR 20314).                    

                        Because of the degree of public interest in the rule, we are reopening the comment period on the proposed rule. For additional information, see the document that reopens the comment period, which is published in the “Proposed Rules” section of this issue of the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# DATES:

The direct final rule amending 40 CFR parts 141 and 142, published on April 14, 2000 (65 FR 20304), is withdrawn as of June 13, 2000.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennifer Melch, Implementation and Assistance Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (MC-4606), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 260-7035. Information may also be obtained from the EPA Safe Drinking Water Hotline. Callers within the United States may reach the Hotline at (800) 426-4791. The Hotline is open Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays, from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. EST.

Dated: June 8, 2000.

J. Charles Fox,

Assistant Administrator, Office of Water.

[FR Doc. 00-14886 Filed 6-12-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5005

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for more equitable

payments for direct graduate medical education under the Medicare Program.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 27, 2000

Mr. BILBRAY (for himself, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mr. HUNTER, and Mr. PACKARD) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Commerce,

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 amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide

for more equitable payments for direct graduate medical

education under the Medicare Program.

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 ‘‘Direct Graduate Med5 ical Education Equity Act of 2000’’.
2

•HR 5005 IH

1 SEC. 2. FISCAL YEAR 2001 FLOOR SET AT 100 PERCENT OF

2 LOCALITY ADJUSTED NATIONAL AVERAGE

3 PER RESIDENT AMOUNT.

4 (a) ESTABLISHING FY01 FLOOR AT 100 PER5 CENT.—

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—Clause (iii) of section

7 1886(h)(2)(D) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

8 1395ww(h)(2)(D)) is amended by striking ‘‘70 per9 cent’’ and inserting ‘‘100 percent’’.

10 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The heading

11 of such clause is amended by striking ‘‘70 PERCENT’’

12 and inserting ‘‘100 PERCENT’’.

13 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

14 subsection (a) shall apply as if included in the enactment

15 of the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget

16 Refinement Act of 1999 (Public Law 106–113).

Æ
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In  connection  with the Annual Report of Humatech, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form  10-KSB for the year ending April 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange  Commission  on  the  date hereof (the "Report"), I, David G. Williams,
Chief  Executive  Officer  of  the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.   1350, as adopted pursuant to   906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act  of  2002,  that:

          (1)     The  Report  fully  complies  with the requirements of section
13(a)  or  15(d)  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

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


/s/ David G. Williams
-------------------------
David G. Williams
Chief Executive Officer
August 1, 2002
# AGENCY:

 Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

 Notice of Meeting.

# SUMMARY:

 The Southwest Washington Provincial Advisory Committee will meet on Wednesday, January 26, 2000 at the Gifford Pinchot National Forest Office, located at 10600 NE 51 Circle, Vancouver, Washington. The meeting will begin at 10 a.m. and continue until 4:30 p.m. The purpose of the meeting is to: (1) Review the Law Enforcement program on the Forest; (2) Review the Cowlitz Valley Ranger District Flood Restoration Program; (3) Approve revisions to the Committee Vision Statement; and (4) Provide for a Public Open Forum. All Southwest Washington Provincial Advisory Committee meetings are open to the public. Interested citizens are encouraged to attend. The “open forum” provides opportunity for the public to bring issues, concerns, and discussion topics to the Advisory Committee. The “open forum” is scheduled as part of agenda item (4) for this meeting. Interested speakers will need to register prior to the open forum period. The committee welcomes the public's written comments on committee business at any time.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Direct questions regarding this meeting to Linda Turner, Public Affairs Specialist, at (360) 891-5195, or write Forest Headquarters Office, Gifford Pinchot National Forest, 10600 NE 51st Circle, Vancouver, WA 98682.

Dated: January 14, 2000.

Claire Lavendel,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 00-1504 Filed 1-20-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION

CASE NO. 22-81294-CIV-CANNON

DONALD J. TRUMP,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Defendant.

/

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO FILE 

REDACTED AND UNREDACTED GLOBAL ISSUES BRIEFS UNDER SEAL

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the parties’ Joint Motion to File Portions of 

Global Issues Briefs Under Seal (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 168]. The Motion seeks permission to 

file underseal four documents, which are two alternate versions of the parties’ two briefs submitted 

to the Special Master, which refer to certain seized materials or categories of seized materials, and 

which fall within the scope of the protective order issued by the Special Master [ECF No. 113]. 

The Court has reviewed the Motion and is otherwise duly advised. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Motion [ECF No. 168] is GRANTED.

2. On or before November 8, 2022, the parties shall file the four documents described 

above under seal. 

3. The seal will remain in place until further order of the Court. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida this 8th day of November

2022.

 _________________________________

 AILEEN M. CANNON

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record

Case 9:22-cv-81294-AMC Document 169 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2022 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 13.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 20-F of British Energy plc, (the “Company”) for the annual period ended March 31, 2004 (the“Periodic Report”), I, Martin Gatto, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby 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 thePeriodic Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company. 

 

 

Date:September 30, 2004 

 

----
§ 401.93 Access to Seaway property. ( a ) Except as authorized by an officer, no person shall load or unload goods on property of the Corporation or the Manager.
( b ) Except as authorized by an officer or by the Seaway Property Regulations or its successors, no person shall enter upon any land or structure of the Manager or the Corporation or in any Seaway canal or lock area.
[39 FR 10900, Mar. 22, 1974, as amended at 65 FR 52915, Aug. 31, 2000; 72 FR 2620, Jan. 22, 2007]
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Injuries and Accident Causes in the Brewing Industry, 1944

              																	McCormack, George R. (George Robertson)					,	McElroy, Frank S. (Frank Shafer)					 and 	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Injuries and Accident Causes in the Brewing Industry, 1944 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 884*,												Washington: 								U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 										1946,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4339,			accessed on August 31, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 21-cv-23103-BB

CASA EXPRESS CORP, as Trustee of

CASA EXPRESS TRUST,

Judgment Creditor,

vs.

BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF 

VENEZUELA,

Judgment Debtor.

_____________________________________/

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO CONTINUE 

SEPTEMBER 25, 2023 HEARING

Without objection, Respondents, Raul Gorrin Belisario, Planet 2 Reaching, 

Inc., Posh 8 Dynamic, Inc., RIM Group Investments Corp., RIM Group Investments 

I Corp., RIM Group Investments II Corp., and RIM Group Investments III Corp., 

through undersigned counsel, move the Court for a continuance of the hearing 

currently scheduled for Monday, September 25, 2023 at 1:30 p.m., which falls on 

the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur.

1. On August 31, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Motion to determine whether 

Gorrin must testify in person at the jury trial in this matter. ECF No. 220. 

2. On September 1, 2023, Magistrate Judge Otazo-Reyes issued a 

Paperless Order setting a hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for September 25, 2023 at 

1:30 p.m. ECF No. 221. September 25, 2023 is the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur.

3. On September 6, 2023, Plaintiff filed its First Motion to Extend Notices 

of Lis Pendens. ECF No. 222. 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 224 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/13/2023 Page 1 of 2
4. On September 11, 2023, Magistrate Judge Otazo-Reyes issued a 

Paperless Supplemental Order advising the Parties that Plaintiff’s First Motion to 

Extend Notices of Lis Pendens would also be heard on September 25, 2023 at 1:30 

p.m. ECF No. 223.

5. Undersigned counsel for Respondents, who is Jewish, intends to 

participate in the hearing scheduled for September 25, 2023, and therefore

respectfully requests that the hearing be rescheduled to a later date. 

6. Good cause exists to continue the September 25, 2023 hearing and no 

party will be prejudiced by the requested continuance.

CERTIFICATION REGARDING PRE-FILING CONFERENCE

Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a)(3), undersigned counsel certifies that Plaintiff 

does not oppose the relief requested in the Motion. 

Respectfully submitted,

BLACK SREBNICK, P.A.

201 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 1300

Miami, Florida 33131 

Tel. (305) 371-6421

/s/ Howard Srebnick 

HOWARD SREBNICK, ESQ.

Florida Bar No. 919063

E-mail: HSrebnick@RoyBlack.com

Attorney for Respondents

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 224 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/13/2023 Page 2 of 2
§ 3041.410 Required findings. ( a ) In order to authorize the addition of a negotiated service agreement to the competitive product list, the Commission must make the findings specified in § 3041.310, except as provided in §§ 3041.315, 3041.320, and 3041.325.
( b ) [Reserved].
EXHIBIT 31.1
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Charles R. Mollo, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Mobility Electronics,Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement ofa material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
     a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated 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 registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
     c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
     a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.      /s/ Charles R. Mollo       Charles R. Mollo     President and Chief Executive Officer     August 9, 2004  
 -26-
FeedbackSite MapContact

HOW CAN WE HELP YOU?
		Search for:
	HomeAbout ADRLegislation and Interagency ADR Working GroupReport for the President on Significant Developments in Federal Alternative Dispute Resolution, January 2017 (PDF)External-Facing Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution Services for the PublicConflict Prevention, Management and Resolution Services for the Federal WorkforcePrograms and ContactsResources and GuidanceConflict Prevention, Management and Resolution Resources for Federal ADR ProgramsInteragency ADR Working Group Resource CenterEventsCoalition of Federal Ombuds
Search for:  Selection Factors

															Home/ADR Resources and Guidance/Guidance/Selection Factors Selection FactorsADR2022-02-18T08:12:06-05:00
			
			Selection FactorsAll of the forums discussed in this guide have judges who are available to serve as neutrals, at no cost to the parties.  If the parties desire instead to look outside the federal government, an agency may use procedures other than competitive procedures to hire an expert or neutral for use in a dispute resolution proceeding.
The definitions of a neutral found in the ADRA of 1996 and the FAR give lots of flexibility to the parties.  When selecting a neutral, here are some factors to consider:
What type of ADR process are the parties using?  An arbitration is not a mediation, and the skill-set the neutral employs is not the same.
Does the neutral need to be a subject matter expert?
Does the neutral need strong mediation/facilitation skills?
What is the neutral’s role going to be?  Will the neutral engage in outcome prediction, or be a facilitator?
Does the neutral need special expertise based on the posture of the case?
Does the neutral need to be well-versed in the facts of the particular dispute?
If selecting co-neutrals, will they work together as one?
Does the neutral have credibility with each party?
Does the neutral have significant conflict of interest or impartiality issues?
Are costs affordable (privately-procured neutrals only)?
Are there concerns with conflicts of interest/impartiality?
What is the size and visibility of the dispute?Which factors are most important?  Of course, it depends on the dispute and the process the parties want to use.  If the parties want a mediation in which the neutral evaluates their cases and gives them an opinion as to likely outcome, subject-matter expertise and credibility are important attributes for the neutral.  If the parties don’t want an opinion, but do want someone to help them discuss the issues in a positive, forward-looking way, mediation skills may be more important than subject-matter expertise.  Having said that, respondents to surveys generally identified the neutral’s subject matter expertise, reputation, and ADR experience as the most important factors in the neutral’s selection.  Size of the claim, legal expertise (as opposed to subject matter expertise) and the mediator’s fee and costs were least important. Copyright 2022 ADR.gov | All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use  |  FOIA  |  Section 508