alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 15 (Monday, January 24, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 3666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-1657]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Application for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instrument

    Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific and 
Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-651; 80 Stat. 
897; 15 CFR part 301), we invite comments on the question of an 
instrument of equivalent scientific value, for the purposes for which 
the instrument shown below is intended to be used, is being 
manufactured in the United States.
    Comments must comply with 15 CFR 301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the 
regulations and be filed within 20 days with the Statutory Import 
Programs Staff, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230. 
Application may be examined between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. in Room 
4211, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, 
N.W., Washington, D.C.
    Docket Number: 00-001. Applicant: USDA, Agricultural Research 
Service, 800 Buchanan Street, Albany, CA 94710. Instrument: Picking and 
Gridding Q-Bot System. Manufacturer: Genetix Ltd., United Kingdom. 
Intended Use: The instrument is intended to be used in experiments that 
will include: isolation, characterization and DNA sequencing of genes 
from organisms of agronomic importance; gridding of clone collections 
onto filters for gene isolation and genome characterization; 
construction of DNA microarrays; rearraying clones and samples into new 
matrix collections; replication of clones and clone library samples.
    Application accepted by Commissioner of Customs: January 6, 2000.

Frank W. Creel,
Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff.
[FR Doc. 00-1657 Filed 1-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
No. 11-1075.

#### Ahmad *v.*Holder, Attorney General.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1

               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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Environmental Solutions
Worldwide, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period September 30, 2009 (the
"Report"), David J. Johnson, Chief Executive Officer, and President 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:

(1) To my knowledge, the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

                                          DATE: November 13, 2009

                                          /S/ DAVID J. JOHNSON
                                          --------------------
                                          DAVID J. JOHNSON
                                          CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRESIDENT

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Environmental Solutions Worldwide,
Inc. and will be retained by Environmental Solutions Worldwide, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"20-1557: PROPPANT EXPRESS INVESTMENTS LLC v. OREN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC [ORDER], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"PaDhsHsCXw\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/06-03-2022-20-1557-proppant-express-investments-llc-v-oren-technologies-llc-order-20-1557-order-6-3-2022_1960414\/\">20-1557: PROPPANT EXPRESS INVESTMENTS LLC v. OREN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC [ORDER], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/06-03-2022-20-1557-proppant-express-investments-llc-v-oren-technologies-llc-order-20-1557-order-6-3-2022_1960414\/embed\/#?secret=PaDhsHsCXw\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“20-1557: PROPPANT EXPRESS INVESTMENTS LLC v. OREN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC [ORDER], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"PaDhsHsCXw\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"ORDER Posted: PROPPANT EXPRESS INVESTMENTS LLC v. OREN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC [ORDER](pdf) Appeal Number: 20-1557 Origin: PTO Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
```

[House Report 106-578]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-578

======================================================================

 
  WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY 
   HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 290, THE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE 
                      BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

                                _______
                                

   April 12, 2000.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

                Mr. Goss, from the Committee on Rules, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 474]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 474, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                  summary of provisions of resolution

    The resolution waives all points of order against the 
conference report to accompany House Concurrent Resolution 290, 
the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2001, 
and against its consideration. The rule provides that the 
conference report shall be considered as read. The rule further 
provides one hour of debate on the conference report, equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on the Budget.
    The blanket waiver includes a waiver of clause 4(a) of Rule 
XIII (requiring a three-day layover of the committee report). 
The conference report was filed on Wednesday, April 12, and is 
scheduled for consideration on the floor as early as Thursday, 
April 13. The blanket waiver also includes a waiver of clause 9 
of Rule XXII (violating the scope of the conference) because 
the conference report contains provisions which were not 
contained in either the House or Senate versions of the 
concurrent resolution.

                                  

```
#### IN THE MATTER OF VALERIE D. BELMONT.

(Supreme Court Disciplinary No. 668)

(386 SE2d 660)

Decided October 19, 1989.

*William P. Smith III, General Counsel State Bar, Paula J. Frederick, Assistant General Counsel State Bar,*for State Bar of *493Georgia.

*492Per curiam.

Respondent Valerie D. Belmont was found guilty of violating Standards 22, 23, 44, and 68 of Rule 4-102 of the State Bar Rules.

Based upon these violations, the Review Panel of the State Bar Disciplinary Board recommends that respondent, Valerie D. Belmont, be disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Georgia.

It is therefore directed that Valerie D. Belmont be disbarred from the practice of law in the State of Georgia.

*All the Justices concur.*
May 14, 2012

No. 11-8728.

#### Garcia *v.*United States.

C. A. 5th Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis*granted. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of the position asserted by the Solicitor General in his brief for the United States filed on April 11, 2012.
Exhibit 3.04

AMENDMENT TO BYLAWS
                  OF
                  E-LOAN, INC.

Section 3.2 of the Amended and Restated Bylaws of this
Corporation is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:

"The Board of Directors shall consist of seven (7) members.
The number of directors may be changed by an amendment to this bylaw, duly
adopted by the board of directors or by the stockholders, or by a duly adopted
amendment to the certificate of incorporation.  No decrease in the number of
directors constituting the Board of Directors shall shorten the term of any
incumbent director.  The directors shall be divided into three classes, with the
first class consisting of two directors and its term expiring at the 2006 annual
meeting of stockholders; the second class consisting of two directors and its
term expiring at the 2007 annual meeting of stockholders; and the third class
consisting of three directors and its term expiring at the 2005 annual meeting
of stockholders.  Thereafter, the term of each class will expire at each third
succeeding annual meeting of stockholders held after the election of each such
class."

---
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### FEB 22 2005 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

EARL WATSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. COUNTY OF MUSKOGEE, a subordinate political entity in the State of Oklahoma; CLIFF SINYARD, former Sheriff of Muskogee County, in his official capacity; SHIRLEY SHORES, in her individual and official capacity,

Defendants-Appellees. No. 04-7013 (D.C. No. CV-03-297-WH) (E.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before BRISCOE , ANDERSON , and MURPHY , Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously to grant the parties’ request for a dec ision on the briefs without oral-2-

argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Plaintiff Earl Watson appeals the district court’s order granting defendants’ motions for summary judgment on his 42 U.S.C. § 198 3 claim alleging that defendants delayed in providing him proper medical care for an eye injury while he was incarcerated at the Muskogee County Jail. Mr. Watson argues that the district court erred in granting summary judgment b ecause 1) there was evidence of deliberate indifference on the part of the County; 2) Mr. Sinyard’s knowledge could be inferred, he failed to supervise jail pers onnel, and there was a lack of policy concerning medical requests at the time of the incident; and 3) Ms. Shores was personally involved in the circumstances that r esulted in the loss of Mr. Watson’s eye. We review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo , applying the same standard as the district court. Simms v. Okla. ex. rel. Dep’t of Mental Health & Substance Abuse Servs. , 165 F.3d 1321, 1326 (10th Cir. 1999). Having reviewed the briefs, the record, and the app licable law, we conclude that the district court correctly decided this case . We therefore AFFIRM the-3-

judgment for substantially the same reasons stated by the district court in its Order filed January 5, 2004.

Entered for the Court

Michael R. Murphy Circuit Judge
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
financial  statements  for Anaren  Microwave,  Inc.  filed with form 10Q for the
Three  months  ended  September  30, 1997 and is  qualified  in its  entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           3,997,516 
<SECURITIES>                                             0 
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,879,953 
<ALLOWANCES>                                        13,000 
<INVENTORY>                                      8,924,219 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,474,449 
<PP&E>                                          30,457,781 
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (23,423,416)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  27,521,573 
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,434,803 
<BONDS>                                            680,001 
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0 
<PREFERRED>                                              0 
<COMMON>                                            51,257 
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,379,047 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    27,521,573 
<SALES>                                          7,721,323 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,721,323 
<CGS>                                            4,853,726 
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,623,765 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  24,586 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    759,599 
<INCOME-TAX>                                       375,000 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                759,599 
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0 
<CHANGES>                                                0 
<NET-INCOME>                                       759,599 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.17 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.17 
                                              


</TABLE>
§ 60-4.5 Hometown plans. ( a ) A contractor participating, either individually or through an association, in an approved Hometown Plan (including heavy highway affirmative action plans) shall comply with its affirmative action obligations under Executive Order 11246 by complying with its obligations under the plan: *Provided,* That each contractor or subcontractor participating in an approved plan is individually required to comply with the equal opportunity clause set forth in 41 CFR 60-1.4; to make a good faith effort to achieve the goals for each trade participating in the plan in which it has employees; and that the overall good performance by other contractors or subcontractors toward a goal in an approved plan does not excuse any covered contractor's or subcontractor's failure to take good faith efforts to achieve the plan's goals and timetables. If a contractor is not participating in an approved Hometown Plan it shall comply with the specifications set forth in § 60-4.3 of this part and with the goals and timetables for the appropriate area as listed in the notice required by 41 CFR 60-4.2 with regard to that trade. For the purposes of this part 60-4, a contractor is not participating in a Hometown Plan for a particular trade if it: ( 1 ) Ceases to be signatory to a Hometown Plan covering that trade;
( 2 ) Is signatory to a Hometown Plan for that trade but is not party to a collective bargaining agreement for that trade;
( 3 ) Is signatory to a Hometown Plan for that trade but is party to a collective bargaining agreement with labor organizations which are not or cease to be signatories to the same Hometown Plan for that trade;
( 4 ) Is signatory to a Hometown Plan for that trade but is party to a collective bargaining agreement with a labor organization for that trade but the two have not jointly executed a specific commitment to minority and female goals and timetables and incorporated the commitment in the Hometown Plan for that trade;
( 5 ) Is participating in a Hometown Plan for that trade which is no longer acceptable to the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs;
( 6 ) Is signatory to a Hometown Plan for that trade but is party to a collective bargaining agreement with a labor organization for that trade and the labor organization and the contractor have failed to make a good faith effort to comply with their obligations under the Hometown Plan for that trade.
( b ) Contractors participating in Hometown Plans must be able to demonstrate their participation and document their compliance with the provision of the Hometown Plan.
[43 FR 49254, Oct. 20, 1978; 43 FR 51401, Nov. 3, 1978]
#### § 60-2.31 Program summary.

The affirmative action program must be summarized and updated annually. The program summary must be prepared in a format which will be prescribed by the Director and published in the Federal Register as a notice before becoming effective. Contractors and subcontractors must submit the program summary to OFCCP each year on the anniversary date of the affirmative action program.

[65 FR 68042, Nov. 13, 2000, as amended at 85 FR 71572, Nov. 10, 2020]
§ 101.1329 EA Station license, location, modifications. EA licensees may construct master and remote stations anywhere inside the area authorized in their licenses, without prior approval, so long as the Commission's technical and other Rules are complied with, except that individual licenses are required for any master station that: ( a ) Requires the submission of an environmental assessment under § 1.1307 of this chapter;
( b ) Requires international coordination; or
( c ) The station would affect areas identified in § 1.924 of this chapter.
[65 FR 17450, Apr. 3, 2000, as amended at 69 FR 17959, Apr. 6, 2004]
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 125 (Wednesday, June 28, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39975-39976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16221]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3344]


Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs Finding of No Significant 
Impact: City of Sumas, WA

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice of a finding of no significant impact with regard to an 
application to construct, operate and maintain a pipeline to transport 
water across the U.S.-Canada border.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of State has conducted an environmental 
assessment of the proposed construction by the City of Sumas, 
Washington, of a pipeline for the transport of water crossing the 
international boundary near the City of Sumas, Washington. This 
information may be viewed upon request in the Office of International 
Energy and Commodity Policy at the Department of State.
    Based on this information, the Department of State has concluded 
that issuance of a Presidential Permit authorizing construction of the 
pipeline will not have a significant effect on the existing vegetation 
and wildlife, water resources, land use, air quality and human 
population within the United States. In reaching this conclusion, the 
Department of State considered several alternatives, including a no-
action alternative.

[[Page 39976]]

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 
Section 4321 et seq., Council on Environmental Quality Regulations, 40 
CFR 1501.4 and 1508.13 and Department of State Regulations, 22 CFR 
161.8 (C), an environmental impact statement will not be prepared.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON THE PIPELINE PERMIT APPLICATION, CONTACT: 
Bill Memler, Office of International Energy Policy, Room 3535, U.S. 
Department of State, Washington, D.C., 20520, (202) 647-4557.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The City of Sumas is a municipality 
organized and chartered in the State of Washington. On October 14, 
1999, the Department of State published a Notice of Application for a 
Presidential Permit in the Federal Register. No public comments were 
received and concerned agencies expressed no opposition to issuing the 
permit. A finding of no significant impact is adopted, and an 
environmental impact statement will not be prepared.

Stephen Gallogly,
Director, Office of International Energy and Commodities Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-16221 Filed 6-27-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-07-P