alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 30.10 Collection activities. ( a ) *General rule.* The Secretary shall aggressively and timely collect all debts arising out of activities of, or referred or transferred for collection actions to, the Department. Normally, an initial written demand for payment shall be made no later than 30 days after a determination by an appropriate official that a debt exists.
( b ) *Cooperation with other agencies.* The Department shall cooperate with other agencies in their debt collection activities.
( c ) *Transfer of delinquent debts* — ( 1 ) *Mandatory transfer.* The Department shall transfer legally enforceable debts 180 days or more delinquent to Treasury in accordance with the requirements of 31 CFR 285.12. This requirement does not apply to any debt that: ( i ) Is in litigation or foreclosure;
( ii ) Will be disposed of under an approved asset sale program within one year of becoming eligible for sale;
( iii ) Has been referred to a private collection contractor for a period of time acceptable to the Secretary of the Treasury;
( iv ) Is at a debt collection center for a period of time acceptable to the Secretary of the Treasury (see paragraph (c)(2) of this section);
( v ) Will be collected under internal offset procedures within three years after the debt first became delinquent; or
( vi ) Is exempt from this requirement based on a determination by the Secretary of the Treasury that exemption for a certain class of debt is in the best interest of the United States.
( 2 ) *Permissive transfer.* The Secretary may refer debts less than 180 days delinquent, including debts referred to the Department by another agency, to the Treasury in accordance with the requirements of 31 CFR 285.12, or with the consent of the Treasury, to a Treasury-designated debt collection center to accomplish efficient, cost effective debt collection. Referrals to debt collection centers shall be at the discretion of, and for a time period acceptable to, the Secretary of the Treasury. Referrals may be for servicing, collection, compromise, suspension, or termination of collection action.
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 10(p)



List of Officers with Severance Agreements in the form of Exhibit 10(o)



Bonnie J. Brannigan, Vice President of Marketing & Planning
Larry B. Fournier, Vice President of Development
Gregory L. Heywood, Regional Vice President
Christopher S. Holgate, Vice President of Real Estate
Robert A. Lindeman, Vice President of Franchising
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-40196

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

EDUARDO GUZMAN RESENDEZ, 

also known as Juan Garcia Gonzalez,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. M-97-CR-267-1

- - - - - - - - - -

June 16, 1999

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Eduardo Guzman Resendez, also known as Juan Garcia Gonzalez,

appeals his guilty-plea conviction for illegal reentry into the

United States following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(a) and (b). He argues that the district court erred by

applying the sentencing guideline adjustment for obstruction of

justice pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1. We review the district

court’s legal interpretation and application of the sentencing

guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error. 
No. 98-40196

-2-

United States v. Lowder, 148 F.3d 548, 552 (5th Cir. 1998). 

Because the record indicates that Guzman Resendez produced a

fraudulent financial affidavit during his initial appearance

before the magistrate judge, the district court did not commit

error, clear or otherwise, by applying the adjustment for

obstruction of justice. See § 3C1.1, comment. (n.4(c)).

Guzman Resendez also argues that the district court erred by

applying the 16-level increase pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)

because he had been previously deported subsequent to an

aggravated-felony conviction for possession of over 50 pounds of

marijuana. His argument regarding this issue is precluded by our

decision in United States v. Hinojosa-Lopez, 130 F.3d 691 (5th

Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is

AFFIRMED.
###### Editorial Note on Part 304

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 304 appear at 64 FR 6252, Feb. 9, 1999.

#### § 304.10 General administrative requirements.

As a condition for Federal financial participation, the provisions of 45 CFR part 75 (with the exception of 45 CFR 75.306, *Cost sharing or matching* and 45 CFR 75.341, *Financial reporting*) establishing uniform administrative requirements and cost principles shall apply to all grants made to States under this part.

[81 FR 93566, Dec. 20, 2016]
* 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

October 5, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-20262

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TUY VAN NGUYEN,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

No. 4:04-CR-181-3

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

Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Tuy Nguyen appeals the sentences imposed following the entry

of his guilty plea to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methylenedioxymethamphetamine (“MDMA”) (count one), aiding and

abetting possession with intent to distribute MDMA (count four),

and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking

crime (count five). Nguyen was sentenced to concurrent 57-month
No. 05-20262

-2-

terms of imprisonment as to counts one and four and to a consecutive 60-month term for count five. He was also sentenced to concurrent five-year periods of supervised release for each count. He

contends that the sentences are unreasonable because the district

court declined to depart downward based on cultural assimilation.

Nguyen does not challenge the calculation of the advisory

guideline range. The district court considered the sentencing

guidelines, along with the sentencing factors set forth in

18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and determined that sentences at the low end

of the guidelines range were appropriate. Nguyen’s sentences within the properly calculated guidelines range are presumptively reasonable, and he has failed to demonstrate that his sentences are

unreasonable. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554-55

(5th Cir. 2006). Nothing in the record indicates that the district

court based its decision not to depart downwardly on an erroneous

belief that it lacked authority to depart. See United States v.

Landerman, 167 F.3d 895, 899 (5th Cir. 1999).

AFFIRMED.
§ 260.52 What are the basic provisions of the Family Violence Option (FVO)? Section 402(a)(7) of the Act provides that States electing the FVO certify that they have established and are enforcing standards and procedures to: ( a ) Screen and identify individuals receiving TANF and MOE assistance with a history of domestic violence, while maintaining the confidentiality of such individuals;
( b ) Refer such individuals to counseling and supportive services; and
( c ) Provide waivers, pursuant to a determination of good cause, of normal program requirements to such individuals for so long as necessary in cases where compliance would make it more difficult for such individuals to escape domestic violence or unfairly penalize those who are or have been victimized by such violence or who are at risk of further domestic violence.
§ 2521.40 What are the matching requirements? If you are subject to matching requirements under § 2521.35, you must adhere to the following: ( a ) Basic match: At a minimum, you must meet the basic match requirements as articulated in § 2521.45.
( b ) Regulatory match: In addition to the basic requirements under paragraph (a) of this section, you must provide an overall level of matching funds according to the schedule in § 2521.60(a), or § 2521.60(b) if applicable.
( c ) Budgeted match: To the extent that the match in your approved budget exceeds your required match levels under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, any failure to provide the amount above your regulatory match but below your budgeted match will be considered as a measure of past performance in subsequent grant competitions.
[70 FR 39598, July 8, 2005]
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 240 (Thursday, December 14, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 75266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9704]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Center for 
Scientific Special Emphasis Panel, November 28, 2006, 11 a.m., to 
November 28, 2006, 4 p.m. National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge 
Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the Federal Register 
on November 17, 2006, 71 FR 66958-66959.
    The meeting will be held December 19, 2006. The meeting time and 
location remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: December 8, 2006.
Anna Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 06-9704 Filed 12-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
# -rmXi i



# WAYLAN D TRAVE L
30 8 Commonwealt h Road , Waylan d M A0177 8 U S 508-653-460 0 o r800-552-030 0

Fa x508-655-567 2 Email : Karen@waylandtravel.co m Marc h 8 , 201 0 Th e Honorabl e Ra

yLaHood Secretar y Unite d States Departmen t o fTransportatio n 1200 Ne wJerse yAvenue , S

E Washington , D.C

. 2059 0 Subject ; Haned a Combinatio n Service s Allocatio n Proceedin g DOT-OST-2010-001 8 Dea rSecretaryLaHood : A s a dedicate d trave l partne ro fAmerica n Airlines , I a m writin g i n supporto fAmerican' s applicatio n t o provid e ne wservic e fro m Ne wYork' s Joh n F

. Kenned yInternationa l Airportan d Lo s Angele s Internationa l Airport t o Toky o Internationa l Airpor ta tHaneda

. I recogniz e an d applau d yo u an d th e Obam a administratio n fo ryou rsucces s las tDecembe ri n reaching a landmar k

Ope n Skie s agreemen twit h Japan , whic h open s u p Haned a t o servic e by U.S

. airlines

. I encourag e you rselectio n o fAmerica n Airline s t o provid e nonsto p servic e fro m Ne wYor k an d Lo s Angele s t o Haned a i n orde rt o provid e a n essentia l connectio n betwee n thre e o fth e world' s larges t financia l an d commerc e centers

. Recen t events , includin g th e successfu l preservatio n o fJapa n Airlines ' oneworl d Allianc e membership , hav e underscore d American' s strong commitmen tt o th e trans-Pacifi cmarket

. America n i s likewis e committe d t o Ne wYor k an d Lo s Angele s - bot h vita l foca l point s o f business , trade , entertainment , technolog yan d educatio n - providin g unsurpasse d ai rservic e sinc e th e mid-1900 s Bot h th e Ne wYor k

an d Lo s Angele s metr o area s wil l gai n significan teconomi cbenefit s fro m thes e propose d ne wflights , a s wil l American' s customer s an d employees

. However , w e nee d you rhel p t o mak e th e JF K& LAX/Haned a connectio n a reality

. Therefore , I strongl yurg e yo u t o sa yye s t o America n Airline s an d it s reques tfo rslot s t o fl yfro m Kenned yan d Lo s Angele s t o Haneda !

Kare n Schragl e Managin g Directo r
Presidential Documents

9649 

Federal Register 

Vol. 72, No. 41 

Friday, March 2, 2007 

Title 3— 

The President 

Proclamation 8110 of February 28, 2007 

Save Your Vision Week, 2007 

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation 

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. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with FRD2
9650 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 41 / Friday, March 2, 2007 / Presidential Documents 

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 thirtyfirst. 

[FR Doc. 07–1004 

Filed 3–1–07; 11:35 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with FRD2GWBOLD.EPS</GPH>
Exhibit 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Defense Industries International, Inc. (the "Company")
does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarter ended September 30, 2002
of the Company fully complies, in all material respects, with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and
information contained in the Form 10-QSB/A fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date:  November  14,  2002                   By:  /s/  JOSEPH FOSTBINDER
                                                  ---------------------------
                                                  Joseph Fostbinder
                                                  President





Date:  November  14,  2002                   By:  /s/  TSIPI MULDOVAN
                                                  ---------------------------
                                                  Tsipi Muldovan
                                                  Chief Financial  Officer
Exhibit 99.6

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Westport
Innovations Inc. (the Company) on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David R. Demers, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.



|                  |  |                        
|----------------- |  | -----------------------
|February 29, 2012 |  | /s/ David R. Demers    
|                  |  | David R. Demers        
|                  |  | Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies this annual report on Form 40-F pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to
be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
§ 400.112 Child welfare services for refugee children. ( a ) In providing child welfare services to refugee children in the State, a State must provide the same child welfare services and benefits to the same extent as are provided to other children of the same age in the State under a State's title IV-B plan.
( b ) A State must provide child welfare services to refugee children according to the State's child welfare standards, practices, and procedures.
( c ) Foster care maintenance payments must be provided under a State's program under title IV-E of the Social Security Act if a child is eligible under that program.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-31310 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus BERNARDO GARCIA, also known as John Doe, also known as Rafael Nina Encarnacisa, Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(94-CR-46-T-3)

Consolidated with

No. 95-31324 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus BERNARDO GARCIA, a/k/a Beto, Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. 2 for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(94-CR-250-T)
May 16, 1997 Before JOHNSON, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Bernardo Garcia appeals his guilty-plea conviction for using and carrying a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). The record does not establish a factual basis for Garcia’s plea to either the use or carrying of a firearm within the meaning of the
statute. S ee United States v. Hall ,
__ F.3d

__ (5th Cir. Apr. 14, 1997) (No. 95-60551), 1997 WL 180388. Accordingly, we VACATE the conviction and REMAND the case for further proceedings.

VACATED AND REMANDED.
V 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1773 

For the relief of Valerie Plame Wilson. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 26, 2009 

Mr. INSLEE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Select 

Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select) 

A BILL 

For the relief of Valerie Plame Wilson. 

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 may be cited as the ‘‘Valerie Plame Wilson 

5 Compensation Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT FROM THE CENTRAL IN7 TELLIGENCE AGENCY. 

8 For purposes of any determination of rights under 

9 title III of the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement Act 

10 (50 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.), Valerie Plame Wilson of Wash11 ington, District of Columbia, shall be considered to have 

12 met the age and consent requirements that apply under 


jbell on PRODPC61 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1773 IH

1 section 233(a) of such Act (50 U.S.C. 2053(a)) by virtue 

2 of section 302(b) of such Act (50 U.S.C. 2152(b)). 

Æ 


jbell on PRODPC61 with BILLS
#### § 213.24 Evidentiary purpose.

The hearing is directed to receiving factual evidence and expert opinion testimony related to the issues in the proceeding. Argument will not be received in evidence; rather it should be presented in statements, memoranda, or briefs, as determined by the presiding officer. Brief opening statements, which shall be limited to statement of the party's position and what he intends to prove, may be made at hearings.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1673 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1673

To amend the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 with respect 
                           to bonus payments.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 23, 2009

  Mr. Daniel E. Lungren of California introduced the following bill; 
       which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 with respect 
                           to bonus payments.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF PROVISION.

    Section 111(b)(3)(D) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 
2008 (12 U.S.C. 5221(b)(3)(D)) is amended by striking ``(iii) The 
prohibition required under clause (i) shall not be construed to 
prohibit any bonus payment required to be paid pursuant to a written 
employment contract executed on or before February 11, 2009, as such 
valid employment contracts are determined by the Secretary or the 
designee of the Secretary.''.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 15.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation
by reference in Registration Statement (No. 333-160580) on Form F-3 of our reports dated May 24, 2012, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Sterlite Industries (India) Limited and subsidiaries (the Company) (which
report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the convenience translation of the Indian Rupee into United States dollar amounts) and the effectiveness of the Companys internal control over financial
reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Sterlite Industries (India) Limited for the year ended March 31, 2012.

We
also consent to the reference to us in Item 3A. Selected Consolidated Financial Data.



|                            
|----------------------------
|/s/ Deloitte Haskins & Sells
|Deloitte Haskins & Sells    
|Mumbai, Maharashtra, India  
|May 24, 2012