alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**HOME | 	  ABOUT US | 	  CONTACT | 	  REGIONAL MANAGERS**Nautical Charts & Pubs****Surveys & Wrecks****GIS & Other Products****Research & Development****Customer Service****Business Opportunities****Education****NGA Chart: 81001          Scale: 1,000,000          Edition: 1          Edition Date: 02-SEP-89          CORRECTED TO NTM:  1989/48**Notice Listing-  **Click the +/- buttons and drag the slider tool (solid triangle) 				to zoom in and out.** 
-  **Click the arrow buttons to pan left/right and up/down.** 
-  **Drag 				the navigation box in the upper left hand corner to move around 				the chart image.								This chart display or derived product can be used as a planning or analysis tool and may not be used as a navigational aid. 								NOTE: Use the official, full scale NGA nautical chart for real navigation whenever possible.  These are available from authorized 				NGA nautical chart sales agents.  Screen captures of the on-line viewable charts available here do NOT fulfill chart carriage 				requirements for regulated commercial vessels under Titles 33 and 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations.								Adobe Flash Player		  		is required to view the chart image.				Powered by Zoomify.** 
Privacy  |  Disclaimer  |  NOAA's National Ocean Service  |  NOAA  |  U.S. Department of Commerce **
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 7013** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. CHARLES EMMANUEL BROWN , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte
. Graham C. Mullen , Senior District Judge. ( 3:99

- cr - 00154

- GCM

- 1; 3:14

- cv - 00458

- GCM )

Submitted : November 19 , 2015 Decided: November 23, 2015

Before NIEMEYER , KING , and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Charles Emmanuel Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas A. O’Malley, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Charles Emmanuel Brown seeks to appeal the district court ’ s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (20 12 ) motion
. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than 60 days after the entry of the district court ’ s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007). The district court ’ s order was enter ed on the docket on October 21, 2014 . The notice of appeal was filed on June 17 , 2015
. * Because Brown failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

* For the purpose of this appeal, we assume that the date appearing on the notice of appeal is the earliest date it could have been properly delivered to prison officials for mailing to the court. Fed. R. App. P. 4(c); Houston v. Lack , 487 U.S. 266 (1988).3 materials before th is cour t and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
###### Editorial Note on Part 46

#### Editorial Note:

The Department of Health and Human Services issued a notice of waiver regarding the requirements set forth in part 46, relating to protection of human subjects, as they pertain to demonstration projects, approved under section 1115 of the Social Security Act, which test the use of cost—sharing, such as deductibles, copayment and coinsurance, in the Medicaid program. For further information see 47 FR 9208, Mar. 4, 1982.

#### § 46.203 Duties of IRBs in connection with research involving pregnant women, fetuses, and neonates.

In addition to other responsibilities assigned to IRBs under this part, each IRB shall review research covered by this subpart and approve only research which satisfies the conditions of all applicable sections of this subpart and the other subparts of this part.
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1516 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 22, 2009 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 37926 Church Street in Dade City, Florida, 

as the ‘‘Sergeant Marcus Mathes Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


smartinez on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

HR 1516 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SERGEANT MARCUS MATHES POST OFFICE. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 37926 Church Street in Dade 

4 City, Florida, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Ser5 geant Marcus Mathes Post Office’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sergeant Marcus 

10 Mathes Post Office’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 21, 2009. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


smartinez on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
July 22, 2013 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW. 

Washington, DC 20591. 

~ """ : Il!!II .. i ~ ... 

Chandler. .,." Arizona 

W7.!ere Values Make The Difference 

~~~lE.fi'W~~ /:lUG 1\) 20\3 

PARI16~E1S 

RE: Part 16 Complaint Chandler Air Service v. City of Chandler Municipal Airport 

To Whom it May Concern: 

enandler Air Service filed a Part 16 complaint against the City of Chandler on or about July 1, 2013. I 

"anted to make sure that the FAA's docketing notice or a copy of it is sent to me as the attorney for the 

efty of Chandler if the FAA decides to address the complaint. My direct contact information is provided 

below my name. 

Please feel free to contact me with questions or comments. 

Sincerely, , /I ' 

~r~~7cgehL--J Kay Bigelow 

Acting Chandler City Attorney 

Post Office Box 4008, MS 602 

Chandler, Arizona 85244-4008 

Telephone: 480-782-4640 

Fax: 480-782-4652 

Email: Kay.Bigelow@chandleraz.gov 

Mailing Addr,,, 

Mail Stop 602 

PO Box 41108 

Chandler, Arizona 85244-4008 

Printed on rrycled paper '0 

Office of the City Attorney 

Tdeph,., (480) 782-464ll 

Fax (480) 782-4652 

Web www.chandleraz.gov 

Location 

Suite 202 

55 North Arizona Place 

Chandler, Arizona 85225
§ 78.3 Benefits not denied to rehabilitated offenders. ( a ) No individual convicted of any Federal or State offense involving the distribution of controlled substances shall be denied Federal benefits relating to long-term drug treatment programs for addiction under 21 U.S.C. 853a(a)(2) if: ( 1 ) The individual declares himself or herself to be an addict and submits to a long-term treatment program for addiction as defined by § 78.2(b), provided that in the determination of the sentencing court there is a reasonable body of evidence to substantiate the individual's declaration that such individual is an addict; or
( 2 ) The individual is, in the determination of the sentencing court, deemed to be rehabilitated as defined by § 78.2(a).
( b ) No individual convicted of any Federal or State offense involving the possession of controlled substances shall be denied any Federal benefit, or otherwise subject to penalties and conditions, under 21 U.S.C. 853a(b)(2) if: ( 1 ) The individual declares himself or herself to be an addict and submits to a long-term treatment program for addiction as defined by § 78.2(b), provided that in the determination of the sentencing court there is a reasonable body of evidence to substantiate the individual's declaration that such individual is an addict; or
( 2 ) The individual is, in the determination of the sentencing court, deemed to be rehabilitated as defined by § 78.2(a).
§ 503.2 General policies—Privacy Act. The Commission will protect the privacy of an individual identified in any information or record systems which it maintains. Accordingly, its officials and employees, except as otherwise provided by law or regulation, will: ( a ) Permit an individual to determine what records pertaining to that individual are collected, maintained, used or disseminated by the Commission.
( b ) Permit an individual to prevent a record pertaining to that individual obtained by the Commission for a particular purpose from being used or made available for another purpose without the individual's consent.
( c ) Permit an individual to gain access to information pertaining to that individual in Commission records, to have a copy made of all or any portion thereof, and to correct or amend those records.
( d ) Collect, maintain, use, or disseminate any record of identifiable personal information in a manner that assures that the Commission's action is for a necessary and lawful purpose, that the information is current and accurate for its intended use, and that adequate safeguards are provided to prevent misuse of the information.
( e ) Permit exemptions from record requirements provided under the Privacy Act only where an important public policy use for the exemption has been determined in accordance with specific statutory authority.
# CE2009295EN.01009801.xml

| 4.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 295/98 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 295/98

---

Tuesday 2 September 2008Youth in Action programme (2007-2013) ***I

P6_TA(2008)0369

European Parliament legislative resolution of 2 September 2008 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1719/2006/EC establishing the Youth in Action programme for the period 2007 to 2013 (COM(2008)0056 — C6-0057/2008 — 2008/0023(COD))

2009/C 295 E/25

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2008)0056),

having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 149(4) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0057/2008),

having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education (A6-0274/2008),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

---

Tuesday 2 September 2008P6_TC1-COD(2008)0023

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 2 September 2008 with a view to the adoption of Decision No .../2008/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1719/2006/EC establishing the Youth in Action programme for the period 2007 to 2013

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at first reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Decision No 1349/2008/EC.)

---
§ 1641.18 Causes for removal. The debarring official may remove an IPA from performing audit services in accordance with the procedures set forth in this part upon a finding by a preponderance of the evidence that: ( a ) The IPA has failed significantly to comply with government auditing standards established by the Comptroller General of the United States, generally accepted auditing standards and/or OIG audit guidance as stated in the OIG Audit Guide for Recipients and Auditors, including the Compliance Supplement for Audits of LSC Recipients, and in OIG Audit Bulletins;
( b ) The IPA is currently debarred from contracting with any Federal agency or entity receiving Federal funds, including when the IPA has stipulated to such debarment;
( c ) The IPA's license to practice accounting has been revoked, terminated or suspended by a state licensing body or other organization with authority over IPAs;
( d ) The IPA has been convicted of any offense indicating a breach of trust, dishonesty or lack of integrity, or conspiracy to commit such an offense, and the conviction is final; or
( e ) The IPA has been found subject to a civil judgment for any action indicating a breach of trust, dishonesty or lack of integrity, or conspiracy to take such action, and the judgment is final.
#### William R. Seward, *Trustee, etc.,*and others, *Respondents, v.*Burrall Spencer and others, *Appellants*.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Smith, J.
§ 505.1 Persons eligible to file claims. Persons eligible to file claims with the Commission under the provisions of sections 5(i) and 6(f) of the War Claims Act of 1948, as amended, are: ( a ) Civilian American citizens captured and held in Southeast Asia or their eligible survivors, under the provisions of section 5(i) of the Act; and
( b ) Members of the Armed Forces of the United States held as prisoners of war during the Vietnam conflict or their eligible survivors, under section 6(f) of the Act.
#### Roberts *v.*Napier Brothers.

Submitted July 18,

Decided November 12, 1906.

Certiorari. Before Judge Felton. Bibb superior court. January 3, 1906.

*John B. Cooper,*for plaintiff in error. *B. L. Anderson,*contra.

Rise, C. J.

1. It is essential to the validity of an appeal in a justice’s court, not in forma pauperis, that the appellant give bond and security for the eventual condemnation-money. Civil Code, §§ 4140, 4458.

2. An instrument purporting to be an appeal bond, which is not signed by a surety, is fatally defective. *Gordon*v. *Robertson,*26 *Ga.*410; *McMurria*v. *Powell,*120 *Ga.*766, and cit.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
Jack Speight (Wyoming Bar No. 4-0983)

4021 Snyder Ave

Cheyenne, WY 82001

307.635.1239 [Tel.]

jbspeight@gmail.com

Benjamin T. Barr

10737 Hunting Lane

Rockville, MD 20850

202.595.4671 [Tel.]

benjamin.barr@gmail.com

Stephen R. Klein

Wyoming Liberty Group

1902 Thomes Ave, Ste. 201

Cheyenne, WY 82001

307.632.7020 [Tel.]

stephen.klein@wyliberty.org

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF WYOMING

____________________________________

)

FREE SPEECH, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 12-CV-127-S

)

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, )

)

Defendant. )

____________________________________)

MOTION FOR INJUNCTION PENDING APPEAL

Case 2:12-cv-00127-SWS Document 46 Filed 10/19/12 Page 1 of 3
Free Speech respectfully moves this Court for an injunction pending appeal of this 

Court’s October 3, 2012 ruling denying Plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief 

(Docket Nos. 41–42). See Fed. R. App. P. 8(a)(1)(C). Because of the limited time before the 

November 6, 2012 elections and because the standards for an injunction on appeal are the same 

as those for preliminary injunctions, Free Speech incorporates its filed Memorandum in Support 

of Preliminary Injunctive Relief (Docket No. 20) to support this motion. Plaintiff also intends to 

file a motion for injunctive relief with the Tenth Circuit as soon as feasible to effectuate relief in 

this case. 

In compliance with Local Rule 7.1(b), counsel for Free Speech has conferred with the 

FEC on October 19, 2012 and it opposes this motion in its entirety. 

Date: October 19, 2012

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Stephen Klein

Stephen R. Klein

Wyoming Liberty Group

1902 Thomes Ave., Ste. 201

stephen.klein@wyliberty.org

307.632.7020 [Tel.]

Benjamin T. Barr

10737 Hunting Lane

Rockville, MD 20850

202.595.4671 [Tel.]

benjamin.barr@gmail.com

Jack Speight 

4021 Snyder Ave

Cheyenne, WY 82001

307.635.1239 [Tel.]

jbspeight@gmail.com

Case 2:12-cv-00127-SWS Document 46 Filed 10/19/12 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 19, 2012, I the below listed persons received copies of 

this document by electronic mail via Electronic Case Filing pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 

5(b)(2)(E):

Anthony Herman

Federal Election Commission

aherman@fec.gov

Erin Chlopak

Federal Election Commission

echlopak@fec.gov

David Kolker

Federal Election Commission

dkolker@fec.gov

Lisa Stevenson

Federal Election Commission

lstevenson@fec.gov

Nicholas Vassallo

United States Attorney’s Office

nick.vassallo@usdoj.gov

/s/ Stephen Klein

Stephen Klein 

Case 2:12-cv-00127-SWS Document 46 Filed 10/19/12 Page 3 of 3
Editorial Note on Part 46
Editorial Note: The Department of Health and Human Services issued a notice of waiver regarding the requirements set forth in part 46, relating to protection of human subjects, as they pertain to demonstration projects, approved under section 1115 of the Social Security Act, which test the use of cost—sharing, such as deductibles, copayment and coinsurance, in the Medicaid program. For further information see 47 FR 9208, Mar. 4, 1982.

§ 46.407 Research not otherwise approvable which presents an opportunity to understand, prevent, or alleviate a serious problem affecting the health or welfare of children. HHS will conduct or fund research that the IRB does not believe meets the requirements of § 46.404, § 46.405, or § 46.406 only if: ( a ) The IRB finds that the research presents a reasonable opportunity to further the understanding, prevention, or alleviation of a serious problem affecting the health or welfare of children; and
( b ) The Secretary, after consultation with a panel of experts in pertinent disciplines (for example: science, medicine, education, ethics, law) and following opportunity for public review and comment, has determined either: ( 1 ) That the research in fact satisfies the conditions of § 46.404, § 46.405, or § 46.406, as applicable, or
( 2 ) The following: ( i ) The research presents a reasonable opportunity to further the understanding, prevention, or alleviation of a serious problem affecting the health or welfare of children;
( ii ) The research will be conducted in accordance with sound ethical principles;
( iii ) Adequate provisions are made for soliciting the assent of children and the permission of their parents or guardians, as set forth in § 46.408.
§ 506.17 Rate of and basis for award of compensation. ( a ) Compensation allowed a prisoner of war during the Vietnam conflict under section 6(f)(2) of the War Claims Act of 1948, as amended, will be paid at the rate of $2 per day for each day on which that person was held as prisoner of war and on which the hostile force, or its agents, failed to furnish the quantity and quality of food prescribed for prisoners of war under the Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949.
( b ) Compensation allowed a prisoner of war during the Vietnam conflict under section 6(f)(3) of the Act, will be paid at the rate of $3 per day for each day on which that person was held as a prisoner of war and on which the hostile force failed to meet the conditions and requirements under the provisions of the Geneva Convention of August 12, 1949 relating to labor of prisoners of war or for inhumane treatment by the hostile force by which such person was held.
( c ) Compensation under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section will be paid to the prisoner of war or qualified applicant on a lump-sum basis at a total rate of $5 per day for each day the prisoner of war was entitled to compensation.
Additional Resources 1

Tacoma-Pierce County PM2.5 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan

Appendix E. Additional Resources

Websites

 Ecology’s Tacoma-Pierce County Nonattainment Area Website

 Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Nonattainment Area Website

 Tacoma-Pierce county Clean Air Task Force Website

 Tacoma-Pierce County Clean Air Task Force Final Report & Recommendations

o Recommendations Overview: more detail of the three primary recommendations 

o Full Report: 82 pages, including appendixes 

o Executive Summary: 10 pages 

Washington and PSCAA Laws and Rules

 PSCAA Regulation 1-13, Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards

 Ch. 173-433 WAC, Solid Fuel Burning Devices

 Substitute House Bill 2326 Chapter 219, Laws of 2012

Washington State Implementation Plan Revisions

 Clean Data Determination Letter to EPA, May 22, 2012 77 FR 53772, Sept. 4, 2012

 State Implementation Plan Revision: Tacoma-Pierce 

County Nonattainment Area, Nov. 28, 2012, Publication 

12-02-016

78 FR 32131, May 29, 

2013

 Motor Vehicle Emission Budget Letter to EPA, Nov. 28, 

2012

78 FR 57503, Sept. 19, 

2013

 Updates to Solid Fuel Burning Devices Regulation, 

Chapter 173-433 WAC, January 30, 2014, Publication 13-

02-038

79 FR 26628, May 9, 2014
Additional Resources 2

Tacoma-Pierce County PM2.5 Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan

EPA Rules and Policy Guidance 

 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter (2006), 71 FR 61144, 

Oct. 17, 2006

 Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle NAAQS, 74 FR 58688, 

November 13, 2009

 Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule, 72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007, See 40 

CFR Part 51 Subpart Z – Provisions for Implementation of PM2.5 National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards

 Identification of Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for Submission of SIP 

Provisions, 78 FR 69806, November 21, 2013

 Procedures for Processing Request to Redesignate Areas to Attainment, U.S. EPA, 

Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, 

September 4, 1992

 Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment, U.S. EPA, Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, 

Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14 1994

 Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 

U.S. EPA, Memo from Stephen D. Page, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, Dec. 14, 2004

Additional Technical Information

 Summary Technical Report in Support of PM2.5 Clean Air Performance Commitment 

(CAPC) Process for Tacoma Washington, Oct. 14, 2010 

 Sources of Fine Particles in the Wapato Hills-Puyallup River Valley PM2.5 Nonattainment 

Area, Washington Dept. of Ecology, April 2010, Publication 10-02-009
§ 690.123 Early termination of research support: Evaluation of applications and proposals. ( a ) The department or agency head may require that Federal department or agency support for any project be terminated or suspended in the manner prescribed in applicable program requirements, when the department or agency head finds an institution has materially failed to comply with the terms of this policy.
( b ) In making decisions about supporting or approving applications or proposals covered by this policy the department or agency head may take into account, in addition to all other eligibility requirements and program criteria, factors such as whether the applicant has been subject to a termination or suspension under paragraph (a) of this section and whether the applicant or the person or persons who would direct or has/have directed the scientific and technical aspects of an activity has/have, in the judgment of the department or agency head, materially failed to discharge responsibility for the protection of the rights and welfare of human subjects (whether or not the research was subject to federal regulation).