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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Notice of Meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

The Tehama County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Red Bluff, California. Agenda items to be covered include: (1) Introductions, (2) Approval of Minutes, (3) Public Comment, (4) Status of Legislation, (5) New Allocation, (6) Chairman's Perspective, (7) General Discussion, (8) Next Agenda.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on January 11, 2007, from 9 a.m. and end at approximately 12 p.m. 

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Lincoln Street School, Conference Room A, 1135 Lincoln Street, Red Bluff, CA. Individuals wishing to speak or propose agenda items must send their names and proposals to David T. Morton, Acting DFO, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95988.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Bobbin Gaddini, Committee Coordinator, USDA, Mendocino National Forest, Grindstone Ranger District, P.O. Box 164, Elk Creek, CA 95939. (530) 968-5329; E-MAIL                         *ggaddini@fs.fed.us.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting is open to the public. Committee discussion is limited to Forest Service staff and Committee members. However, persons who wish to bring matters to the attention of the Committee may file written statements with the Committee staff before or after the meeting. Public input sessions will be provided and individuals who made written requests by January 7, 2007 will have the opportunity to address the committee at those sessions.

Dated: December 7, 2006.

David T. Morton, 

Acting Designated Federal Official.

[FR Doc. 06-9651 Filed 12-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
§ 213.32 Decisions following hearing. ( a ) If the Administrator is the presiding officer, he shall, when the time for submission of posthearing briefs has expired, issue his decision within 60 days.
( b ) ( 1 ) If a hearing examiner is the presiding officer, he shall, when the time for submission of posthearing briefs has expired, certify the entire record, including his recommended findings and proposed decision, to the Administrator. The Administrator shall serve a copy of the recommended findings and proposed decision upon all parties, and amici, if any.
( 2 ) Any party may, within 20 days, file with the Administrator exceptions to the recommended findings and proposed decision and a supporting brief or statement.
( 3 ) The Administrator shall thereupon review the recommended decision and, within 60 days of its issuance, issue his own decision.
( c ) If the Administrator concludes that a State plan does not comply with Federal requirements, he shall also, in the case of a hearing pursuant to § 201.6(a) of this chapter, specify whether further payments will not be made to the State or whether, in the exercise of his discretion, payments will be limited to categories under or parts of the State plan not affected by such noncompliance. The Administrator may ask the parties for recommendations or briefs or may hold conferences of the parties on this question.
( d ) The decision of the Administrator under this section shall be the final decision of the Secretary and shall constitute “final agency action” within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 704 and a “final determination” within the meaning of section 1116(a)(3) of the Act and § 201.7 of this chapter. The Administrator's decision shall be promptly served on all parties, and amici, if any.
[36 FR 1454, Jan. 29, 1971, as amended at 36 FR 21520, Nov. 10, 1971]
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 84 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. J. RES. 84

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the United States Fish and 
 Wildlife Service relating to ``Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 
   Plants; Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating 
                          Critical Habitat''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 15, 2024

 Mr. Ricketts (for himself, Ms. Lummis, Mr. Sullivan, Mrs. Capito, Mr. 
 Daines, Mr. Lee, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Risch, Mr. Rounds, Mrs. Britt, Mr. 
   Wicker, Mr. Crapo, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Marshall, and Mr. Hoeven) 
  introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the United States Fish and 
 Wildlife Service relating to ``Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 
   Plants; Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating 
                          Critical Habitat''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service relating 
to ``Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing Endangered 
and Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat'' (89 Fed. Reg. 
24300 (April 5, 2024)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAMES ROBERT BRISCOE III, Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v. RICHARD MADRID ; et al., Defendants

- Appellees. No. 19

- 15318
D.C. No. 1:17

- cv - 00716

- DAD

SKO

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Dale A. Drozd, District Judge, Presiding Submitted July 14, 2020 * *
Before: CANBY, FRIEDLAND, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges. James Robert Briscoe III appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging constitutional claims

. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A

. Resnick v. Hayes , 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000)

. We affirm.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUL 20 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 19

- 15318 The district court properly dismissed Briscoe’s § 1983 claim s against Madrid because B riscoe failed to allege facts s ufficient to show that Madrid was a
state actor

. See Hebbe v. Pliler , 627 F.3d 338, 341

- 42 (9th Cir. 2010) (although pro se pleadings are construed liberally, plaintiff must present factual allegations sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief) ; George v. Pac.

– CSC Work Furlough , 91 F.3d 1227, 12 30

- 32 (9th Cir. 1996) ( plaintiff alleging infringement of constitutional rights by private parties must show that the infringement constitutes state action ; explaining a pproaches for determining state action )

. A ny claims arising from Madrid’s conduct described in Briscoe’s complaint arise under s tate law and , absent a cognizable federal claim, are not properly before the federal
court s . The district court properly dismissed Briscoe’s § 1983 claim s against the
Doe defendants because Briscoe failed to allege facts sufficient to state a claim

. See Patel v. Kent Sch. Dist. , 648 F.3d 965, 971

- 72, 974 (9th Cir. 2011) (explaining “special

- relationship” and “state

- created danger” exceptions to the general rule that a state actor is not liable for an omission or failure to protect) ; Hebbe , 627 F.3d at
341

- 42

. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying B riscoe further leave to amend his complaint because amendment would have been futile

. See Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. , 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011)3 19

- 15318 (setting forth standard of review and explaining that dismissal without leave to amend is appropriate where amendment would be futile). We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief

. See Padgett v. Wrigh t , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009)

. Briscoe’s request to correct the case caption (Docket Entry No. 9) is granted

. AFFIRMED.
Carroll,

No. 5302.

#### L. Winston Hamm, *Adm'r v.*Rena E. Piper *& a.*

Submitted January 8, 1965.

Decided February 26, 1965.

*James J. Railed,*for the plaintiff.

*Eliot U. Wyman,*for the defendant.

Per curiam.

This bill in equity was before the court in June 1964, when it was held that an order of dismissal in the nature *175of a nonsuit was properly entered as to the claim that the conveyance by the husband of the plaintiff’s intestate, Ethel, “was made for the fraudulent purpose of defeating Ethel’s rights under RSA 560:10 and 11.” *Hamm*v. Piper, 105 N. H. 418, 421. The plaintiff’s exception to the order was sustained, however, as to his claim that the conveyance was fraudulently made for the purpose of depriving Ethel of her dower right. *Id.*

Thereafter the plaintiff moved in the Superior Court for a “new trial” on all issues upon the theory that the order of dismissal entered at the former trial deprived him of an opportunity to establish a prima facie case by cross-examination of witnesses which might otherwise have been called by the defendant. The defendant then moved that the trial be limited to the issue of “intent to deprive the plaintiff’s intestate of her dower rights.”

The Court (Griffith, J.) denied the plaintiff’s motion and granted the defendant’s motion, “on the ground that the Supreme Court opinion in this case in effect constitutes a nonsuit on all issues except the issue stated in the defendant’s motion.” All questions raised by the plaintiff’s exceptions to this order were reserved and transferred.

The plaintiff’s motion was properly denied. While evidence necessary to a plaintiff’s case may be supplied after erroneous denial of a nonsuit, and thus preclude a directed verdict founded upon deficiencies in the plaintiff’s evidence *(Gagnon*v. *Dana,*69 N. H. 264, 268), it obviously does not follow that a plaintiff is entided to a new trial because an order of dismissal, properly entered, has deprived him of an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses which the defendant might or might not have called had the motion been erroneously denied. The plaintiff’s exceptions are overruled.

The defendant’s brief properly supports the ruling of the Trial Court. It further suggests that the bill now be dismissed upon the assumption, contrary to our prior holding, that die plaintiff’s intestate became entided to dower upon her husband’s decease *(cf.*2 Tiffany, Real Property (3d ed.) *s.*533, *p.*422; *Thayer*v. *Thayer,*14 Vt. 107), and that she thereafter released it under RSA 560:11. “A question of law once decided in a cause is not reexamined in the same case except upon a motion for rehearing.” *Tucker*v. *Lowe,*79 N. H. 259, 260. See also, *Derosier*v. *Company,*82 N. H. 405, 407. This is particularly so where the issue is not transferred.

*Exceptions overruled.*
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

Area StudiesArt AppreciationArt EducationCultural AwarenessForeign CountriesGlobal EducationInternational CommunicationPrimary EducationVisual Literacy

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Identifiers - Location:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
#### § 2507.18 Requester categories and fees charged.

(a) The FOIA establishes the following categories of requesters and, depending on the category, these types of fees to be paid:

(1) Commercial use requesters: these pay search, review, and duplication fees.

(2) Non-commercial scientific institutions, educational institutions whose purpose is scholarly or scientific research, or news media requesters: these pay only duplication fees.

(3) All other requesters: these pay search and duplication fees.

(b) The fee schedule for search, review, and duplication is as follows:

| Requester | Search fee | Review fee | Duplication fee |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Commercial use requester | $70.00 per hour | $70.00 per hour | For photocopies, 20¢ per page. |
| Educational & Non-Commercial Scientific institutions | No fee | No fee | For photocopies, the first 100 pages are free; after that, 20¢ per page. |
| Representatives of the news media | No fee | No fee | For photocopies, the first 100 pages are free; after that, 20¢ per page. |
| All others | The first two hours are free; after that, $70.00 per hour | No fee | For photocopies, the first 100 pages are free; after that, 20¢ per page. |

Table 1 to Paragraph (b)
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 11, 2009 

l0901 

Order 

 

September 11, 2009 

137049 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137049 

 COA: 285902 

Wayne CC: 06-003474 

HOWARD JAMAL SANDERS, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 9, 2008 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting 

leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Wayne Circuit Court to determine whether 

the defendant should be awarded jail credit and, if the court finds that he is entitled to 

such credit, to apply the credit to the sentence in this case. In all other respects, leave to 

appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the remaining question presented 

should be reviewed by this Court.
CERTIFICATIONI, Kokmeng Koh, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-Drequired to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K ofPrincipal Life Income Fundings Trust 2006-47 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, donot contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which suchstatements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and otherinformation required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by thisreport is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;  4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required inthis report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the ExchangeAct period reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicingagreement(s) in all material respects; and  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment ofcompliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be includedin this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in suchreports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by thefollowing unaffiliated parties: Citibank, N.A. and Bankers Trust Company, N.A.Date: March 28, 2007   /s/ Kokmeng Koh     Kokmeng Koh  Second Vice President
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Geological Survey

# AGENCY:

U.S. Geological Survey.

# ACTION:

Notice of Prospective Intent to Award Exclusive License. 

# SUMMARY:

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) is contemplating awarding an exclusive license to: Williamson and Associates, 1124 NW., 53rd Street, Seattle, WA 98107 on U.S. Patent Nos. 6,236,211 B1 and 6,236,212 B1, both entitled “Induced Polarization Method Using Towed Cable Carrying Transmitters and Receivers for identifying Minerals on the Ocean Floor.”

*Inquiries:*                         If other parties are interested in similar activities, or have comments related to the prospective awards, please contact Neil Mark, USGS, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS 201, Reston, Virginia 20192, voice (703) 648-4344, fax (703) 648-7219, or e-mail                         *nmark@usgs.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    This notice is submitted to meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 208*et seq.*

Dated: December 7, 2006.

Karen D. Baker,

Associate Director, Office of Administrative Policy and Services.

[FR Doc. 06-9690 Filed 12-13-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-Y7-M
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

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

The undersigned, Y. Tristan Kuo, the Chief Financial Officer of
CHINA BIOLOGIC PRODUCTS, INC. (the Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2009 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the
Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this statement
this 31st day of March, 2011.

| | /s/ Y.
      Tristan Kuo
| | ------------------------
| | Y. Tristan Kuo          
| | Chief Financial Officer 
| | (Principal Financial and
| | Accounting Officer)     

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to China Biologic Products, Inc. and will be retained by
China Biologic Products, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being
filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the
Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general
incorporation language in such filing.

---
Date of 

report 

1987 

Apr 14 

27 

jJruatt nf t4r Juitr~ itates 

NINETIETH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION-Began January 10, 1967 

EXECUTIVE CALENDAR 

Prepared under the dtrection of FRANCIS R V ALEO, Secretary of the Senate 

By GERALD A. HACKETT, Executive Clerk 

Friday, April 28, 1967 

NOMINATIONS 

Calendar Message ~arne o! nom1nea Office Predecessor 

No No 

AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOP· 

MENT 

129 86 Rutherford M Poats, of Deputy Adnumstrator, 

V1rgJ.n1a Agency for International 

Development 

[NEW REPORT] 

GOVERNOR OF GUAM 

146 131 Manuel F L Guerrero, of Governor of Guam for a Reappomtment 

Guam term of 4 years 

65-002-67-No 41 

U S GOVERNMENT" I'RINTINW. QFFlCI!. IUD
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.                  

###### Election Assistance Commission

# AGENCY:

United States Election Assistance Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice of public meeting.

# Date AND Time:

Thursday, December 7, 2006, 10 a.m.-3p.m.

# Place:

U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 1225 New York Ave, NW., Suite 150, Washington, DC 20005. (Metro Stop: Metro Center).

# Agenda:

The Commission will receive presentations on public comments received for the DRAFT Procedural Manual for Voting System Testing and Certification Program and the proposed final document will be considered for approval. The Commission will  receive presentations from election officials, community interest groups, academicians and technology experts regarding the 2006 election. The Commission will elect officers for 2007 and consider other administrative matters.

This meeting will be open to the public.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bryan Whitener, Telephone: (202) 566-3100.

Thomas R. Wilkey,

Executive Director, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

[FR Doc. 06-9311  Filed 11-16-06; 11:51 am]

BILLING CODE 6820-KF-M