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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4826 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4826

 To amend the Wilderness Act to permit the landing of aircraft within 
   wilderness areas for purposes of search and rescue under certain 
                             circumstances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 25, 1994

  Mr. Schiff introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Wilderness Act to permit the landing of aircraft within 
   wilderness areas for purposes of search and rescue under certain 
                             circumstances.

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

SECTION 1. SEARCH AND RESCUE BY AIRCRAFT IN WILDERNESS AREAS.

    Section 4(d) of the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 and following) 
is amended by adding the following at the end thereof:
    ``(8) Upon the request of any law enforcement or military authority 
(including the national guard), the landing of aircraft shall be 
permitted within any wilderness area for purposes of search and 
rescue.''.
                                 <all>
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 11, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-60211

Summary Calendar

 

IVAN CALIXTO-GONZALEZ,

Petitioner,

versus

JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

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

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A78 961 801

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

Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ivan Calixto-Gonzalez, a native and citizen of El Salvador,

petitions for review of an order from the Board of Immigration

Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision

to deny his application for asylum. Calixto-Gonzalez has waived

the denial of his application for withholding of removal by

failing to assert that denial as a basis for reversal. See

Rodriguez v. INS, 9 F.3d 408, 414 n.15 (5th Cir. 1993). This

court will uphold the BIA’s factual finding that an alien is not

eligible for asylum if the determination is supported by
No. 04-60211

-2-

substantial evidence. Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 903 (5th

Cir. 2002). “The substantial evidence standard requires only

that the Board’s conclusion be based upon the evidence presented

and be substantially reasonable.” Ontunez-Tursios v. Ashcroft,

303 F.3d 341, 350 (5th Cir. 2002) (internal quotation marks and

citations omitted). Because the BIA summarily affirmed without

opinion the IJ’s decision, the IJ’s decision is the final agency

determination for judicial review. See 8 C.F.R.

§ 1003.1(a)(7)(iii); Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 832 (5th

Cir. 2003).

Calixto-Gonzalez has failed to make the requisite showing

that he was unable to return to El Salvador “because of

persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of

race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social

group, or political opinion . . . .” 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A);

see also Jukic v. INS, 40 F.3d 747, 749 (5th Cir. 1994).

Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED.
§ 64.6060 Annual reporting and certification requirement. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 8549 , Feb. 8, 2024.
Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 77365 , Sept. 20, 2024.
( a ) Providers must submit a report to the Commission, by April 1st of each year, regarding interstate, intrastate, and international Inmate Calling Services for the prior calendar year. The report shall be categorized both by facility type and size and shall contain: ( 1 ) Current interstate, intrastate, and international rates for Inmate Calling Services;
( 2 ) Current Ancillary Service Charge amounts and the instances of use of each;
( 3 ) The Monthly amount of each Site Commission paid;
( 4 ) [Reserved]
( 5 ) The number of TTY-based Inmate Calling Services calls provided per facility during the reporting period;
( 6 ) The number of dropped calls the reporting Provider experienced with TTY-based calls; and
( 7 ) The number of complaints that the reporting Provider received related to *e.g.,* dropped calls, poor call quality and the number of incidences of each by TTY and TRS users.
( b ) An officer or director of the reporting Provider must certify that the reported information and data are accurate and complete to the best of his or her knowledge, information, and belief.
[80 FR 79179, Dec. 18, 2015, as amended at 85 FR 67462, Oct. 23, 2020; 87 FR 75515, Dec. 9, 2022; 89 FR 8549, Feb. 8, 2024]
No. 11-222.

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

C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.
§ 68.300 Labeling requirements. ( a ) Terminal equipment approved as set out in this part must be labeled in accordance with the requirements published by the Administrative Council for Terminal Attachments and with requirements of this part for hearing aid compatibility and volume control.
( b ) All registered telephones, including cordless telephones, as defined in § 15.3(j) of this chapter, manufactured in the United States (other than for export) or imported for use in the United States, that are hearing aid compatible, as defined in § 68.316, shall have the letters “HAC” permanently affixed thereto. “Permanently affixed” means that the label is etched, engraved, stamped, silkscreened, indelibly printed, or otherwise permanently marked on a permanently attached part of the equipment or on a nameplate of metal, plastic, or other material fastened to the equipment by welding, riveting, or a permanent adhesive. The label must be designed to last the expected lifetime of the equipment in the environment in which the equipment may be operated and must not be readily detachable. Telephones used with public mobile services or private radio services, and secure telephones, as defined by § 68.3, are exempt from the requirement in this paragraph (b).
[62 FR 61664, Nov. 19, 1997, as amended at 64 FR 3048, Jan. 20, 1999; 66 FR 7585, Jan. 24, 2001; 86 FR 23629, May 4, 2021]
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.1
                                                                    ------------


                                CERTIFICATIONS OF
               CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I,  Victor  Salerno,  certify,  pursuant  to  18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report  on  Form  10-KSB  of American Wagering, Inc. for the annual period ended
January  31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Annual  Report  on  Form  10-KSB  fairly  presents  in all material respects the
financial  condition  and  results  of  operations  of  American  Wagering, Inc


                         By:    /s/ Victor  Salerno
                                -------------------------
                         Name:  Victor  Salerno

                         Title: Chief  Executive  Officer

                         Date:  April  25,  2003

I, Timothy F. Lockinger, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report  on  Form  10-KSB  of American Wagering, Inc. for the annual period ended
January  31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Annual  Report  on  Form  10-KSB  fairly  presents  in all material respects the
financial  condition  and  results  of  operations  of  American  Wagering, Inc.

                         By:    /s/ Timothy  F.  Lockinger
                                -------------------------
                         Name:  Timothy  F.  Lockinger

                         Title: Chief  Financial  Officer

                         Date:  April  25,  2003
Dismiss Writ and Opinion Filed September 25, 2013 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05-13-01264-CV IN RE STEVEN EDMOND LOWE, Relator Original Proceeding from Dallas County, Texas 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices FitzGerald, Lang, and Myers Opinion by Justice FitzGerald Before the Court is relato r’s petition for writ of mandamus naming the Dallas County District Clerk and one of the de puty clerks as respondents. The facts and issues are well known to the parties, so we need not rec ount them herein. This Court do es not have mandamus jurisdiction over these individuals. See T EX . G OV = T C ODE A NN . ' 22.221 (West 2010). Accordingly, we DISMISS relator = s petition for a writ of mandamu s for want of jurisdiction and DENY his motion for bench warrant or in the alternative motion fo r hearing by conference call and his petition for expunction of records.

131264F.P05 /Kerry P. FitzGerald/ KERRY P. FITZGERALD JUSTICE
#### § 78.65 Additional orders.

In case the rules of this part do not cover all phases of operation with respect to external effects, the Commission may make supplemental or additional orders in each case as may be deemed necessary.
#### § 73.6017 Class A TV station protection of Class A TV stations.

An application to change the facilities of a Class A TV station will not be accepted if it fails to protect authorized Class A stations in accordance with the requirements of § 74.793 (b) through (d) and § 74.793(g) of this chapter. This protection must be afforded to applications for changes in other authorized Class A stations filed prior to the date the Class A application is filed.

[89 FR 7263, Feb. 1, 2024]
§ 87.261 Scope of service. ( a ) Aeronautical enroute stations provide operational control communications to aircraft along domestic or international air routes. Operational control communications include the safe, efficient and economical operation of aircraft, such as fuel, weather, position reports, aircraft performance, and essential services and supplies. Public correspondence is prohibited.
( b ) Service must be provided to any aircraft station licensee who makes cooperative arrangements for the operation, maintenance and liability of the stations which are to furnish enroute service. In emergency or distress situations service must be provided without prior arrangements.
( c ) Except in Alaska, only one aeronautical enroute station licensee will be authorized at any one location. In Alaska, only one aeronautical enroute station licensee in the domestic service and one aeronautical enroute station licensee in the international service will be authorized at any one location. (Because enroute stations may provide service over a large area containing a number of air routes or only provide communications in the local area of an airport, location here means the area which can be adequately served by the particular station.)
( d ) In Alaska, only stations which serve scheduled air carriers will be licensed to operate aeronautical enroute stations. Applicants must show that the station will provide communications only along routes served by scheduled air carriers.
( e ) Mobile units may be operated under an aeronautical enroute station authorization so long as the units are limited to use at an airport and are only used to communicate with aircraft on the ground or the associated aeronautical enroute station. Mobile units are further limited to operation on the VHF frequencies listed in 87.263(a)(1).
( f ) Mobile units licensed under paragraph (e) of this section shall not be operated on air traffic control frequencies, nor cause harmful interference to, communications on air traffic control frequencies.
[53 FR 28940, Aug. 1, 1988, as amended at 64 FR 27476, May 20, 1999]
§ 80.873 VHF radiotelephone transmitter. ( a ) The transmitter must be capable of transmission of G3E emission on 156.300 MHz and 156.800 MHz, and on frequencies which have been specified for use in a system established to promote safety of navigation. Vessels in waters of other Administrations are required to communicate on any channel designated by that Administration for navigational safety in the bands specified in § 80.871(d).
( b ) The transmitter must be adjusted so that the transmission of speech normally produces peak modulation within the limits of 75 percent and 100 percent.
( c ) The transmitter must deliver a carrier power between 8 and 25 watts into a 50 ohm effective resistance. Provision must be made for reducing the carrier power to a value between 0.1 and 1.0 watts.
( d ) The transmitter complies with the power output requirements specified in paragraph (c) of this section when: ( 1 ) The transmitter is capable of being adjusted for efficient use with an actual ship station transmitting antenna meeting the requirements of § 80.876; and
( 2 ) The transmitter has been demonstrated capable, with normal operating voltages applied, of delivering not less than 8 watts of carrier power into 50 ohms effective resistance over the frequency band specified in § 80.871(d). An individual demonstration of the power output capability of the transmitter, with the radiotelephone installation normally installed on board ship, may be required; and
( 3 ) It is certificated as required by subpart F of this part.
[51 FR 31213, Sept. 2, 1986, as amended at 63 FR 36607, July 7, 1998]
#### § 80.379 Maritime frequencies assignable to aircraft stations.

This section describes the maritime frequencies assignable to aircraft stations for simplex operations:

(a) Available frequencies:

| Carrier frequency | Conditions of use |
| --- | --- |
| 2738 kHz | (1) |
| 2830 kHz | (1) |
| 3023 kHz | (2) |
| 4125 kHz | (3) |
| 5680 kHz | (2) |
| 121.500 MHz | (4) |
| 123.100 MHz | (4) |
| 156.300 MHz | (5) |
| 156.375 MHz | (5) |
| 156.400 MHz | (5) |
| 156.425 MHz | (5) |
| 156.450 MHz | (5) |
| 156.625 MHz | (5) |
| 156.800 MHz | (5) |
| 156.900 MHz | (5) |
| 157.100 MHz | (6) |
| 157.425 MHz | (5)(7) |

(b) The conditions of use of the carrier frequencies in paragraph (a) of this section, are:

(1) For permissible geographic areas of operation see § 80.373(b)(1). For other limitations see § 80.373(b)(7);

(2) Aircraft and ship stations may use 3023.0 kHz and 5680.0 kHz for search and rescue scene-of-action coordination including communications between these stations and participating land stations. Stations using these frequencies must use J3E emission;

(3) Assignable for distress and safety communications between aircraft and maritime mobile stations;

(4) Assignable for search and rescue between ships and aircraft. Stations using these frequencies must use A3E emission;

(5) These frequencies may be used by aircraft stations when:

(i) The altitude of aircraft stations does not exceed 300 meters (1,000 feet), except for reconnaissance aircraft participating in icebreaking operations where an altitude of 450 meters (1,500 feet) is allowed;

(ii) The mean power of aircraft stations must not exceed five watts;

(iii) Communications are limited to operations in which the maritime mobile stations are primarily involved and where direct communications between the aircraft and the ship or coast station is required;

(iv) Stations may use 156.300 MHz for safety purposes only;

(v) Stations may use 156.800 MHz for distress, safety and calling only; and

(vi) Use of 156.375 MHz by aircraft is not permitted in the New Orleans VTS area specified in § 80.383.

(6) The use of 157.100 MHz is limited to communications with stations of the Department of Interior at Lake Mead, Nevada; and

(7) Commercial fishing vessels and associated aircraft may use 157.425 MHz while engaged in commercial fishing activities except within 120 km (75 miles) of the United States/Canada border and Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca and its approaches, the Great Lakes, and the St. Lawrence Seaway.

[51 FR 31213, Sept. 2, 1986, as amended at 58 FR 44953, Aug. 25, 1993]
§ 115-1.109 Numbering in FPMR system. ( a ) The numbering system used in EPPMR conforms to that of the FPMR except for the chapter number. The first three digits represent the Chapter number assigned to this Agency in title 41, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). In FPMR the chapter number is 101 and in EPPMR the Chapter number is 115.
( b ) Where EPA Chapter 115 implements Chapter 101 the material will be numbered and captioned to correspond to the FPMR part, subpart, section or subsection, e.g., 115-1.106 “Applicability of FPMR” implements 101-1.106 of FPMR.
( c ) Where Chapter 115 supplements the FPMR and deals with subject matter not contained in the FPMR, the EPPMR material is numbered to follow that which is most closely related to similar material in the FPMR, Supplementing material is numbered “50” or higher.
- [Untitled]
- fl 2016
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4923

To equalize the minimum adjustments to prices for fluid milk under milk

marketing orders and to require the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct

a study regarding the solids content of beverage milk.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 9, 1994

Mr. BARCA of Wisconsin introduced the following bill; which was referred to

the Committee on Agriculture

A BILL

To equalize the minimum adjustments to prices for fluid

milk under milk marketing orders and to require the

Secretary of Agriculture to conduct a study regarding

the solids content of beverage milk.

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 shall be known as the ‘‘Dairy Equity Act’’.
2

•HR 4923 IH

1 SEC. 2. EQUALIZATION OF MINIMUM PRICE ADJUSTMENT

2 FOR CLASS I MILK FOR ALL MARKETING

3 AREAS.

4 (a) USE OF SAME PRICE.—Section 8c(5)(A) of the

5 Agricultural Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 608c(5)(A)), reen6 acted with amendments by the Agricultural Marketing

7 Agreement Act of 1937, is amended—

8 (1) in the third sentence—

9 (A) by striking ‘‘Throughout’’ and all that

10 follows through ‘‘order involved), the’’ and in11 serting ‘‘The’’; and

12 (B) by striking ‘‘on the date’’ and all that

13 follows through the end of the table in that sen14 tence and inserting ‘‘shall be the same for each

15 marketing area subject to an order and shall be

16 $1.80 per hundredweight of milk having 3.5

17 percent milkfat, with a transportation sur18 charge determined by the Secretary to com19 pensate handlers for the actual cost of moving

20 milk within and between orders.’’; and

21 (2) by striking the fourth sentence.

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

23 this section shall take effect on the first day of the first

24 month beginning more than 120 days after the date of

25 the enactment of this Act.
3

•HR 4923 IH

1 SEC. 3. STUDY OF SOLIDS CONTENT OF BEVERAGE MILK.

2 (a) FINDING.—Congress finds that current standards

3 for milk solids not fat contained in class I milk for fluid

4 use produced in geographic areas covered by milk market5 ing orders issued pursuant to section 8c of the Agricul6 tural Adjustment Act (7 U.S.C. 608c), reenacted with

7 amendments by the Agricultural Marketing Agreement

8 Act of 1937, are below the average levels of milk solids

9 not fat contained in unprocessed fluid milk that is pro10 duced on farms of producers.

11 (b) STUDY.—Not later than 1 year after the date of

12 the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture

13 shall—

14 (1) study the desirability and effects of fortify15 ing class I fluid milk described in subsection (a)

16 with additional nonfat solids, including consumer ac17 ceptance of fortifying the milk; and

18 (2) report the results of the study to the Com19 mittee on Agriculture of the House of Representa20 tives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,

21 and Forestry of the Senate.

Æ
{"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":"15-3173: FEDERAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. DEFENSE [ORDER - DENYING PANEL REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC], Precedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"AbR0oAZ2YV\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/12-03-2018-15-3173-federal-education-association-v-defense-order-denying-panel-rehearing-and-rehearing-en-banc-15-3173-order-12-3-2018-1\/\">15-3173: FEDERAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. DEFENSE [ORDER – DENYING PANEL REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC], Precedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/12-03-2018-15-3173-federal-education-association-v-defense-order-denying-panel-rehearing-and-rehearing-en-banc-15-3173-order-12-3-2018-1\/embed\/#?secret=AbR0oAZ2YV\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“15-3173: FEDERAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. DEFENSE [ORDER – DENYING PANEL REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC], Precedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"AbR0oAZ2YV\" 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":"Opinions\/Orders posted: FEDERAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. DEFENSE [ORDER – DENYING PANEL REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC](pdf) Appeal Number: 15-3173 Origin: MSPB Precedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}