alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 2520.50 How much time may AmeriCorps members in my program spend in education and training activities? Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 46033 , May 28, 2024.
( a ) No more than 20 percent of the aggregate of all AmeriCorps member service hours in your program, as reflected in the member enrollments in the National Service Trust, may be spent in education and training activities.
( b ) Capacity-building activities and direct service activities do not count towards the 20 percent cap on education and training activities.
[70 FR 39597, July 8, 2005]
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 83 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. J. RES. 83

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
  United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Alcohol, 
Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives relating to ``Definition of `Engaged 
              in the Business' as a Dealer in Firearms''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 15, 2024

 Mr. Cornyn (for himself, Mr. Tillis, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Marshall, Mr. 
 Budd, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Cramer, Mr. Daines, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Rubio, Mr. 
 Scott of Florida, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Ricketts, Mr. Boozman, Mr. Risch, 
 Ms. Lummis, Mr. Hoeven, Mr. Rounds, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Sullivan, Mrs. 
 Hyde-Smith, Mr. Mullin, Mr. Moran, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Lee, Mr. Cotton, 
    Mr. Hawley, Ms. Ernst, Mr. Romney, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Thune, Mr. 
Tuberville, Mr. Scott of South Carolina, Mrs. Fischer, Mr. Wicker, Mr. 
Braun, Mrs. Blackburn, Mr. Vance, Mr. Barrasso, Mrs. Britt, Mr. Graham, 
   Mr. Schmitt, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Cruz, and Mr. Young) introduced the 
 following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
  United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Alcohol, 
Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives relating to ``Definition of `Engaged 
              in the Business' as a Dealer in Firearms''.

    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 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and 
Explosives relating to ``Definition of `Engaged in the Business' as a 
Dealer in Firearms'' (89 Fed. Reg. 28968 (April 19, 2024)), and such 
rule shall have no force or effect.
                                 <all>
```
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 04-625.3 

________________________________________________________________________ 

COMPACT OF FREE ASSOCIATION 

Labor 

 Agreement between 

the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and MICRONESIA 

Signed at Palikir May 14, 2003 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 MICRONESIA 

 

 Compact of Free Association: Labor 

 Agreement signed at Palikir May 14, 2003; 

 Entered into force June 25, 2004.
#### §§ 1706.171-1706.999 [Reserved]
Case 1:14-cv-01419-CRC Document 53 Filed 09/19/16 Page 1 of 1
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No. 14-5297 September Term, 2015

 FILED ON: MARCH 4, 2016

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION,

APPELLEE

v.

CRAIG FOR U.S. SENATE AND LARRY E. CRAIG, INDIVIDUALLY, AND IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS

TREASURER OF CRAIG FOR U.S. SENATE,

APPELLANTS

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Columbia

(No. 1:12-cv-00958)

Before: GARLAND, Chief Judge, GRIFFITH, Circuit Judge, and SENTELLE, Senior Circuit

 Judge

J U D G M E N T

This cause came on to be heard on the record on appeal from the United States District

Court for the District of Columbia and was argued by counsel. On consideration thereof, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the judgment and the remedial orders of the District

Court appealed from in this cause are hereby affirmed, in accordance with the opinion of the court

filed herein this date.

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT:

Mark J. Langer, Clerk

BY: /s/

Ken Meadows

Deputy Clerk

Date: March 4, 2016

Opinion for the court filed by Chief Judge Garland.

USCA Case #14-5297 Document #1602357 Filed: 03/04/2016 Page 1 of 1
#### § 153.730 Deadline for submission of data.

A risk adjustment covered plan or a reinsurance-eligible plan in a State in which HHS is operating the risk adjustment or reinsurance program, as applicable, must submit data to be considered for risk adjustment payments and charges and reinsurance payments for the applicable benefit year by April 30 of the year following the applicable benefit year or, if such date is not a business day, the next applicable business day.

[87 FR 27387, May 6, 2022]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 2 (Thursday, January 4, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 346]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9971]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Center for Research Resources; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Center for Research Resources 
Special Emphasis Panel, Wisconsin NPRC.
    Date: January 24-26, 2007.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: The Madison Concourse Hotel and Governor's Club, One West 
Dayton Street, Madison, WI 53703.
    Contact Person: Carol Lambert, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Office of Review, National Center For Research 
Resources, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Democracy Blvd. 1 
Dem. Plaza, Room 1076, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-0814, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#432f222e21263137032e222a2f6d2d2a2b6d242c35"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="523e333f30372026123f333b3e7c3c3b3a7c353d24">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine, 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.371, Biomedical 
Technology; 93.389, Research Infrastructure, 93.306, 93.333, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: December 26, 2006.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 06-9971 Filed 1-3-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
IIA 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 91 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 

States Code, of the rule submitted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services relating to ‘‘Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Minimum 

Staffing Standards for Long-Term Care Facilities and Medicaid Institutional Payment Transparency Reporting’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 4, 2024 

Mr. LANKFORD (for himself, Mr. MANCHIN, Mr. BRAUN, Mr. RISCH, Mr. 

CRAMER, Mr. MARSHALL, Mrs. FISCHER, Mr. MORAN, Mr. CASSIDY, Ms. 

LUMMIS, Mrs. HYDE-SMITH, Ms. ERNST, Mrs. BRITT, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. 

TESTER, Mr. HAGERTY, Mr. BOOZMAN, Mr. MULLIN, Mr. COTTON, Mr. 

TILLIS, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. CORNYN, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. DAINES, Mrs. 

BLACKBURN, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. THUNE, Mr. WICKER, Mr. LEE, Mr. 

HOEVEN, and Mr. SULLIVAN) introduced the following joint resolution; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services relating 

to ‘‘Medicare and Medicaid Programs; Minimum Staffing 

Standards for Long-Term Care Facilities and Medicaid 

Institutional Payment Transparency Reporting’’. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by Centers 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•SJ 91 IS 

1 for Medicare & Medicaid Services relating to ‘‘Medicare 

2 and Medicaid Programs; Minimum Staffing Standards for 

3 Long-Term Care Facilities and Medicaid Institutional 

4 Payment Transparency Reporting’’ (89 Fed. Reg. 40876 

5 (May 10, 2024)), and such rule shall have no force or ef6 fect. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Executive Order 13415

# Assignment of Certain Pay-Related Functions

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows: 

**Section 1.***Assignment of Functions.*                         The functions of the President under sections 4505a, 5305, and 5377 of title 5, United States Code, are assigned to the Director of the Office of Personnel Management.                     

**Sec. 2.***Revocations.*                         (a) Sections 3 and 6 of Executive Order 12748 of February 1, 1991, as amended, are revoked. Sections 4, 5, 7, 8, and 9 of Executive Order 12748 are renumbered as sections 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, respectively.                     

(b) Section 2 of Executive Order 12828 of January 5, 1993, is revoked. Section 3 of Executive Order 12828 is renumbered as section 2. 

**Sec. 3.***General Provision.*                         This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity against the United States, its departments, agencies, entities, officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.                    

[FR Doc. 06-9561

Billing code 3195-01-P
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, David G. Hanna, certify that:

1.     I havereviewed this report on Form 10-Q of CompuCredit Corporation;

2.     Based onmy knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and

3.     Based onmy knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

a)               designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)              evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

c)               disclosed in thisreport any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the fourthfiscal period in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, oris reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and

5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent function):

a)               all significantdeficiencies in the design or operation of internal control over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b)              anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.
| Date: November 2,  2004 |                                                 |
|------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                         | /s/ DAVID G. HANNA                                   |
|                         | David G. Hanna                                       |
| * *                     | *Chief  Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board* |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

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



         Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersigned officer of Classic
Communications, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to such officer's
knowledge, that:

         (i)      the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June
                  30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
                  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
                  1934; and

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



Dated: August 19, 2002              /s/ Jimmie Taylor
       ---------------              --------------------------------------------
                                    Name:  Jimmie Taylor
                                           -------------------------------------
                                    Title: Chief Financial Officer
                                           -------------------------------------



         The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a
separate disclosure document.
§ 154.205 Unreasonable rate increases. ( a ) When CMS reviews a rate increase subject to review under § 154.210(a), CMS will determine that the rate increase is an unreasonable rate increase if the increase is an excessive rate increase, an unjustified rate increase, or an unfairly discriminatory rate increase.
( b ) The rate increase is an excessive rate increase if the increase causes the premium charged for the health insurance coverage to be unreasonably high in relation to the benefits provided under the coverage. In determining whether the rate increase causes the premium charged to be unreasonably high in relationship to the benefits provided, CMS will consider: ( 1 ) Whether the rate increase results in a projected medical loss ratio below the Federal medical loss ratio standard in the applicable market to which the rate increase applies, after accounting for any adjustments allowable under Federal law;
( 2 ) Whether one or more of the assumptions on which the rate increase is based is not supported by substantial evidence; and
( 3 ) Whether the choice of assumptions or combination of assumptions on which the rate increase is based is unreasonable.
( c ) The rate increase is an unjustified rate increase if the health insurance issuer provides data or documentation to CMS in connection with the increase that is incomplete, inadequate or otherwise does not provide a basis upon which the reasonableness of an increase may be determined.
( d ) The rate increase is an unfairly discriminatory rate increase if the increase results in premium differences between insureds within similar risk categories that: ( 1 ) Are not permissible under applicable State law; or
( 2 ) In the absence of an applicable State law, do not reasonably correspond to differences in expected costs.
#### § 2500.31 Retirement of logos.

The agency officially retired the day-to-day use of all pre-existing logos, emblems, and other insignia, except the Days of Service logos, but does not relinquish the legal rights to any retired logos.
#### Langley *et al. v.*The State.

Submitted July 16,

Decided July 27, 1906.

Indictment for keeping gaming-house. Before Judge Seabrook. Chatham superior court. May 26, 1906.

*Twiggs & Oliver,*for plaintiffs in error.

*W. W. Osborne, solicitor-general,*and *Dan J. Charlton,*contra.

Atkinson, J.

1. Even if a motion to sever, made after the entry of a plea, and the striking of a jury, is in time, the refusal of such motion will not-be ground for reversing the judgment, when it appears that, at a subsequent stage of the trial, the court reconsidered its decision and offered to sustain the motion, and counsel for the defendants declined the severance thus offered.

2. The ground of the motion complaining of the admission of evidence, not. setting forth in its entirety the evidence objected to, but referring to-the brief of evidence for the same, will not be considered. See *Vinson*v. *State,*124 *Ga.*19 (3) ; *Bennett*v. *Bank,*Ibid. 223 (1); *Screws*v. *Anderson,*Ibid. 361 (1).

3. The evidence authorized the verdict, and no sufficient reason appears for reversing the judgment.

*Judgment af/vrmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, G. J., absent.*
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 3, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 127]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9945]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

Renewal of Department of Defense Federal Advisory Committees

AGENCY: DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 
1972, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix), the Department of Defense gives 
notice that the Threat Reduction Advisory Committee, intends to modify 
the existing charter to include the use of subcommittees. This 
committee and its subcommittees provide necessary and valuable 
independent advice to the Secretary of Defense and other senior Defense 
officials in their respective areas of expertise.
    It is a continuing DoD policy to make every effort to achieve a 
balanced membership on all DoD advisory committees. Each committee is 
evaluated in terms of the functional disciplines, levels of experience, 
professional diversity, public and private association, and similar 
characteristics required to ensure a high degree of balance is 
obtained.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Wilson, DoD Committee Management 
Officer, 703-601-2554.

    Dated: December 22, 2006.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 06-9945 Filed 12-29-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
```
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

72 

KA 11-02221 

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, AND VALENTINO, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V ORDER

WILLIAM J. PLUME, ALSO KNOWN AS WILLIAM J. 

AGUIRRE, ALSO KNOWN AS WILLIAM J. AQUIRE, 

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

CARR SAGLIMBEN LLP, OLEAN (JAY D. CARR OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

LORI PETTIT RIEMAN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LITTLE VALLEY (KELLY M. BALCOM

OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a resentence of the Cattaraugus County Court (Larry

M. Himelein, J.), rendered August 9, 2011. Defendant was resentenced

upon his conviction of burglary in the first degree (two counts),

assault in the first degree (two counts) and assault in the second

degree (two counts). 

It is hereby ORDERED that the resentence so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Entered: February 1, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
§ 2525.450 Is there a limit on the amount of transferred education awards a Designated Recipient may receive? ( a ) If the sum of the value of the requested transfer plus the aggregate value of education awards a Designated Recipient has previously earned or received, through the Designated Recipient's own service term or having previously been transferred an education award, would exceed the aggregate value of two full-time education awards, as determined pursuant to § 2525.50(b), the Designated Recipient will be deemed to have rejected that portion of the education award that would result in the excess.
( b ) If a Designated Recipient has already received the aggregate value of two full-time education awards, they may not receive a transferred education award, and the Designated Recipient will be deemed to have rejected the education award in full.
"I^n Broghamer" 

<KevinBroghamer@yahoo.oo To <rmoroomb@fec.gov> 

m> 

cc '"Davis, Keith A.'" <l«iavis@hdafeccom>. '"Larry. Ness'" 

04/26/2012 10:59 Al^ <larry@nesscpa.com> 

Subject RE: Friends of Todd Young DFAR 

Robert, 

The Friends of Todd Young committee has declined the option for a hearing before the 

Commission to present legal arguments conceming the findings in the draft report. 

If possible, would you be so kind and notify us a few days before the audit becomes public? As 

you probably understand, we have a great interest in this audit and we would like to stay up to 

date on all public/private activities involved with it. 

We do appreciate all of the great communication you've provided the Friends of Todd Young 

committee thus far. 

Thank you again, 

Kevin Broghamer , 

(859) 619-1512 mobile 

(859) 919-2369 fax 

Kevin.Broghamer sl<ype