alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 242.9 Information collection requirements. ( a ) The rules in this part contain information collection requirements subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval under 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. They apply to fish and wildlife harvest activities on public lands in Alaska. Subsistence users will not be required to respond to an information collection request unless a valid OMB number is displayed on the information collection form. ( 1 ) Section 242.6, Licenses, permits, harvest tickets, tags, and reports. The information collection requirements contained in § 242.6 (Federal Subsistence Registration Permit or Federal Designated Harvester Permit forms) provide for permit-specific subsistence activities not authorized through the general adoption of State regulations. Identity and location of residence are required to determine if you are eligible for a permit and a report of success is required after a harvest attempt. These requirements are not duplicative with the requirements of paragraph (a)(3) of this section. The regulations in § 242.6 require this information before a rural Alaska resident may engage in subsistence uses on public lands. The Department estimates that the average time necessary to obtain and comply with this permit information collection requirement is 0.25 hours.
( 2 ) Section 242.20, Request for reconsideration. The information collection requirements contained in § 242.20 provide a standardized process to allow individuals the opportunity to appeal decisions of the Board. Submission of a request for reconsideration is voluntary but required to receive a final review by the Board. We estimate that a request for reconsideration will take 4 hours to prepare and submit.
( 3 ) The remaining information collection requirements contained in this part imposed upon subsistence users are those adopted from State regulations. These collection requirements would exist in the absence of Federal subsistence regulations and are not subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act. The burden in this situation is negligible, and information gained from these reports is systematically available to Federal managers by routine computer access requiring less than 1 hour.
( b ) You may direct comments on the burden estimate or any other aspect of the burden estimate to: Information Collection Officer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1849 C Street, N.W., MS 222 ARLSQ, Washington, D.C. 20240; and the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (Subsistence), Washington, D.C. 20503. Additional information requirements may be imposed if Local Advisory Committees or additional Regional Councils, subject to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), are established under subpart B of this part. Such requirements will be submitted to OMB for approval prior to their implementation.
#### §§ 400.20-400.21 [Reserved]
§ 1631.7 Procurement policies and procedures. Recipients must have written procurement policies and procedures. These policies must: ( a ) Identify competition thresholds that establish the basis (for example, price, risk level, or type of purchase) for the level of competition required at each threshold (for example, certification that a purchase reflects the best value to the recipient; a price comparison for alternatives that the recipient considered; or requests for information, quotes, or proposals);
( b ) Establish the grounds for non-competitive purchases;
( c ) Establish the level of documentation necessary to justify procurements. The level of documentation needed may be proportional to the nature of the purchase or tied to competition thresholds;
( d ) Establish internal controls that, at a minimum, provide for segregation of duties in the procurement process, identify which employees, officers, or directors who have authority to make purchases for the recipient, and identify procedures for approving purchases;
( e ) Establish procedures to ensure quality and cost control in purchasing, including procedures for selecting sources, fair and objective criteria for selecting sources; and
( f ) Establish procedures for identifying and preventing conflicts of interest in the purchasing process.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 10, 2022

No. 04-22-00094-CV

IN RE THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND PROTECTIVE SERVICES

Original Mandamus Proceeding1

ORDER

On February 16, 2022, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The respondent and 

real party in interest filed responses. We CONDITIONALLY GRANT the Department’s petition 

for writ of mandamus as to paragraph 2.1 and DENY the petition as to all other paragraphs. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8.

We ORDER the Honorable Mary Lou Alvarez to, no later than fifteen days from the date 

of this order, vacate those portions of her January 28, 2022 “Order Following Hearing Regarding 

Placement [for J.E.]” ordering the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services to “offer 

a child specific contract with a $1,000 per day offer to Trulight, Pathways, Bair Foundation, and 

Arrow at a minimum to locate placement for [J.E.].” See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8. The writ will issue 

only in the event we are informed Judge Mary Lou Alvarez fails to comply with this order. 

This court’s February 16, 2022 stay of the January 28, 2022 “Order Following Hearing 

Regarding Placement [for J.E.]” is LIFTED.

It is so ORDERED on August 10, 2022.

_____________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 10th day of August, 2022.

_____________________________

Michael A. Cruz, Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2020-PA-02332, styled In the Interest of J.E., a Child, pending in the 285th 

Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Mary Lou Alvarez presiding.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF COMPUCREDIT CORPORATION AND
SUBSIDIARIES FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          54,615
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  105,120
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                           3,467<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 170,763
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     137,335
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   170,763
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                52,268
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   20,939
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0<F3>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 31,329
<INCOME-TAX>                                    11,346
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             19,983
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    19,983
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.55
<FN>
<F1>THE BALANCE SHEET IS UNCLASSIFIED.
<F2>PP&E IS SHOWN NET ON THE BALANCE SHEET.
<F3>INTEREST EXPENSE IS CONSIDERED AN OPERATING EXPENSE
OF THE REGISTRANT.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Total U.S. Exports to  Madagascar

Data in Thousand Dollars 

Data For  JUN. 1999

|Group                 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | Year to Date 6/1998 | Year to Date 6/1999 | % Change | Year Ending 6/1998 | Year Ending 6/1999 | % Change | % Share
|--------------------- | ---- | ---- | ---- | ---- | ------------------- | ------------------- | -------- | ------------------ | ------------------ | -------- | -------
|TEXTILES & APPAREL    | 445  | 19   | 71   | 157  | 23                  | 431                 | 1798.21  | 41                 | 566                | 1288.97  | 0      
|TEXTILE MILL PRODUCTS | 442  | 19   | 41   | 157  | 23                  | 431                 | 1798.21  | 37                 | 566                | 1429.97  | 0.01   
|Fabric                | 411  | 7    | 21   | 150  | 23                  | 431                 | 1798.21  | 23                 | 558                | 2356.92  | 0.01   
|MMF Broadwoven Fabs   | 277  | 0    | 0    | 127  | 0                   | 424                 |          | 0                  | 551                |          | 0.05
---

---

Exhibit 32.2

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Defense Industries International, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009 as filed with the
SEC on the date hereof (the Report), I, Tsippy Moldovan, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, 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/ Tsippy Moldovan
Tsippy MoldovanChief Financial Officer
|------------------------------------------------------------------------

August 14, 2009



---

---
# Save Your Vision Week, 2007

Across our Nation, millions of Americans suffer from eye diseases and vision loss. During Save Your Vision Week, we reinforce the importance of proper eye care and raise awareness about how to protect and prolong healthy vision. 

By taking simple preventative steps such as wearing sunglasses and using protective goggles while exposed to hazardous objects or environments, Americans can help maintain their eyesight. Regular eye exams are also key to safeguarding healthy vision. As a result of the Medicare Modernization Act, Medicare may pay the cost of exams for those who are eligible and have a high risk of diabetic eye disease or glaucoma. More information about healthy vision and eye care can be found by visiting nei.nih.gov. My Administration is committed to helping Americans lead better, healthier lives. By working with community organizations, eye care professionals, and compassionate citizens, we can increase awareness of the importance of regular and diligent eye care and encourage people to takes steps to maintain eye health and keep the precious gift of sight. 

The Congress, by joint resolution approved December 30, 1963, as amended (77 Stat. 629; 36 U.S.C. 138), has authorized and requested the President to proclaim the first week in March of each year as “Save Your Vision Week.” 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim March 4 through March 10, 2007, as Save Your Vision Week. I encourage all Americans to learn more about eye care and eye safety, and take measures to help ensure a lifetime of healthy vision. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-eighth day of February, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-first. 

[FR Doc. 07-1004

Billing code 3195-01-P
### May	27,	2015

**Page 1**  VizTools LLC , 396 Washington Street, Suite 260, Wellesley Hills, MA 02481 - 6209 Roland J. Boucher, Jr. 396 W ashington Street Suite 260 We llesley Hills, MA 02481 - 6209 U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System Operations West Building Ground Floor, Room w12 - 140 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Wa shington, DC 20590 Re: Letter to accompany Certificate from State of Massachusetts Certifying organization of VizTools L.L.C. on February 24, 2012. Dear Sir or Madam: The sole Members of VizTools L.L.C. are Roland J. Boucher and Dolores E. Boucher. Roland J. Boucher and Dolores E. Boucher are both natural born citizens of the United States of America and they are husband and wife. Together they own 100% of VizTools L.L.C. There are no other members. Management of the L.L.C. is vested by the members. There are no other ma nagers, members, partners, or officers. Sincerely,

Roland J. Boucher, Jr. Member VizTools LLC. Enclosures: Petitioner Supports this request with th e following document: State of Massachusetts Certification of L.L.C. of VizTools L.L.C.
1

The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., Chief Judge, United States District

Court for the Western District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

Nos. 06-2904/3907

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. * Appeals from the United States

* District Court for the

Thomas E. Simmons, Jr., * Western District of Missouri.

*

Appellant. * [UNPUBLISHED]

___________

Submitted: September 24, 2007

Filed: October 5, 2007

___________

Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

The district court1

 revoked the supervised release of Thomas E. Simmons, Jr.,

and sentenced him to prison. The court later granted the government’s Federal Rule

of Criminal Procedure 35(b) motion and reduced his sentence. Simmons filed notices

of appeal from both sentences. In Appeal No. 06-2904, we affirm the judgment of the

district court, noting that counsel makes no argument in his brief regarding the

original revocation sentence. We dismiss Appeal No. 06-3907, in which counsel

argues that the reduced sentence is unreasonable, because we lack jurisdiction to
-2-

consider a challenge to the reasonableness of a sentence reduced pursuant to Rule

35(b). See United States v. Haskins, 479 F.3d 955, 957 (8th Cir. 2007) (per curiam).

Last, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________
Memorandum

Date:     April 9, 2014

To:    Docket EPA‐R10‐OAR‐2011‐0916

From:     Donna Deneen, Air Planning Unit

Subject:   18 AAC 50.090

In the SIP submittal received on February 13, 2008, we are only acting on the definitions of

“impairment of visibility” at 18 AAC 50.990 (47) and “reconstruct” and “reconstruction” and

“reconstruction” at 18 AAC 50.990 (88). The remainder of the February 13, 2008, submittal, was

previously approved at 78 FR 10546 (February 14, 2013). (Docket EPA‐R10‐OAR‐2011‐0367)
---

---

Exhibit 32.1

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

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Defense Industries International, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Joseph Postbinder, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, 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/ Joseph Postbinder
Joseph PostbinderChief Executive OfficerNovember 14, 2005
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
#### Savannah Electric Company *v.*McElvey.

Submitted June 11,-

Decided August 13, 1906.

Action for damages. Before Judge Cann. Chatham superior court. August 16, 1905.

*Osborne & Lawrence, for plaintiff in error.*

*Twiggs & Oliver,*contra.

Lumpkin, J.

1. Where the plaintiff’s declaration and the evidence in support of it tended to make a case of a willful tort on the part of a streetcar conductor, committed on a passenger by forcibly pushing or kicking-her off the ear, and the evidence on behalf of the defendant tended to show that after the car had stopped a sufficient length of time and signals had been given, and, upon her failure to alight, it had moved on, she voluntarily stepped from the ear and was injured, it was error to so charge the jury as in effect to authorize them to find in favor of the plaintiff if she was not in fact wilfully ejected from the car, but was injured by reason of negligence on the part of the conductor in not allowing sufficient opportunity for a passenger to leave the ear.

2. There was no error in allowing a witness to testify that on the street where the injury occurred there was a place where street-cars stopped at the crossing.

3. There was no error in charging that the jury might consider whether or not the car ought to have stopped at a given point, in determining questions with reference to the circumstances under which the conductor and plaintiff may have acted, with reference to whether the circumstances would be such as to authorize a finding for punitive damages, and generally in considering the circumstances immediately leading up to and attending the occurrence.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices ooneur, except Fish, O. J., absent.*
§ 2556.710 What political activities are VISTAs prohibited from engaging in? ( a ) A VISTA may not use their official authority or influence to interfere with or affect the result of an election.
( b ) A VISTA may not use their official authority or influence to coerce any individual to participate in political activity.
( c ) A VISTA may not use their official VISTA program title while participating in prohibited political activity.
( d ) A VISTA may not participate in prohibited political activities in the following circumstances: ( 1 ) While they are on duty;
( 2 ) While they are wearing an article of clothing, logo, insignia, or other similar item that identifies AmeriCorps, the VISTA program, or one of AmeriCorps' other national service programs;
( 3 ) While they are in any room or building occupied in the discharge of VISTA duties by an individual employed by the sponsor; and
( 4 ) While using a vehicle owned or leased by a sponsor or subrecipient, or while using a privately-owned vehicle in the discharge of VISTA duties.
#### Oxley, appellant, v. King *et al.*

*Consignor and consignee—advances—agreement to indemnify.*

S. *&*E. consigned tobacco to the plaintiff, on which the latter made advances. The consignments were made through the defendants, who were also in advance to S. & E. To secure the defendants, S. & E. authorized them to draw on the plaintiff for any balance on the shipment in the plaintiff’s hands. The defendants accordingly drew upon this fund for £1,000, at the same time writing to the plaintiff that the draft was drawn against the tobacco, and asking the plaintiff, in case he did not wish to accept, to accept for the defendants’ account, and they would re-imburse him. The draft was accepted before the letter of advice reached the plaintiff, and was charged to the account of S. & E. The plaintiff wrote to the defendants that he had no wish that they should re-imburse him on account of the draft; that it was charged against the tobacco, and he had but little doubt but that the amount would eventually be more than fully covered. On a sale of the tobacco there was a deficiency of more than £500. *Held,*that the defendants were not liable to the plaintiff for such deficiency.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon the report of a referee. The action was brought by John Stewart Oxley against Oliver K. King and others, to recover for a deficiency between the amount of a draft and a shipment of tobacco, to which plaintiffs resorted to make good the advance by them on the draft.

*Tracy, Olmstead*and *Tracy,*for appellants.

*Beardslee & Cole,*for respondents.

Donohue, J.

The head-note fully states the only point passed upon in the opinion, which it is not believed important to publish at length.

*Judgment affirmed.*
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 Defense

###### Office of the Secretary

          - [DOD-2006-OS-0225]

# AGENCY:

Office of the Secretary, DoD.

# ACTION:

Notice to delete systems of records.

# SUMMARY:

The Office of the Secretary of Defense is deleting a system of records notice from its existing inventory of records systems subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.

# DATES:

December 29, 2006.

# ADDRESSES:

OSD Privacy Act Coordinator, Records Management Section, Washington Headquarters Services, 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Juanita Irvin at (703) 696-4940.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Office of the Secretary of Defense systems of records notices subject tot he Privacy Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the records system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendments are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

Dated: December 22, 2006.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

## DODDS 22

### System name:

DOD Dependent Children's School Program Files (June 12, 1997, 62 FR 32089).

### Reason:

The system of records is maintained under the Office of the Secretary notice DODEA 26, entitled, Department of Defense Education Activity Dependent Children's School Program Files (November 1, 2006, 71 FR 64247).

[FR Doc. 06-9928 Filed 12-28-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M