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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2359 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2359

        To clarify the method of execution of Federal prisoners.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 19, 1995

 Mr. McCollum introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To clarify the method of execution of Federal prisoners.

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

SECTION 1. IMPLEMENTATION OF SENTENCE OF DEATH.

    Subsection (a) of section 3596 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended to read as follows:
    ``(a) In General.--A person who is sentenced to death shall be 
committed to the custody of the Attorney General. At the time the 
sentence is to be carried out, it shall be implemented pursuant to 
regulations prescribed by the Attorney General.''.

SEC. 2. USE OF FEDERAL FACILITIES.

    Subsection (a) of section 3597 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended to read as follows:
    ``(a) In General.--A United States marshal charged with supervising 
the implementation of a sentence of death shall use the appropriate 
Federal facilities for this purpose.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 232.19 Availability of records.

Except as otherwise provided, the records and plans required by this part shall be made available to representatives of FRA and States participating under part 212 of this chapter for inspection and copying upon request.
EXHIBIT  32

MAMMATECH
CORPORATIONCERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Mammatech Corporation (the Company)
on  Form 10-QSB for the period ended February 28, 2006, asfiled with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, Henry S.
Pennypacker,  President and Chief Executive Officer and Mary Bailey Sellers, Treasurer
and Chief  Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 the Report fairly  presents, in all material respects, the
financial  condition and result of operations of the Company.
|-- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated:     April
19, 2006

| | By:     /s/
Henry S. PennypackerHenry S. PennypackerTitle:     President,
Chief Executive Officer
| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | /s/      Mary
Bailey SellersMary Bailey SellersTitle:     Treasurer and Chief
Financial Officer
| | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This
certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject
to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.
§ 1542.207 Access control systems. ( a ) *Secured area.* Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the measures for controlling entry to the secured area required under § 1542.201(b)(1) must— ( 1 ) Ensure that only those individuals authorized to have unescorted access to the secured area are able to gain entry;
( 2 ) Ensure that an individual is immediately denied entry to a secured area when that person's access authority for that area is withdrawn; and
( 3 ) Provide a means to differentiate between individuals authorized to have access to an entire secured area and individuals authorized access to only a particular portion of a secured area.
( b ) *Alternative systems.* TSA may approve an amendment to a security program that provides alternative measures that provide an overall level of security equal to that which would be provided by the measures described in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) *Air operations area.* The measures for controlling entry to the AOA required under § 1542.203(b)(1) must incorporate accountability procedures to maintain their integrity.
( d ) *Secondary access media.* An airport operator may issue a second access medium to an individual who has unescorted access to secured areas or the AOA, but is temporarily not in possession of the original access medium, if the airport operator follows measures and procedures in the security program that— ( 1 ) Verifies the authorization of the individual to have unescorted access to secured areas or AOAs;
( 2 ) Restricts the time period of entry with the second access medium;
( 3 ) Retrieves the second access medium when expired;
( 4 ) Deactivates or invalidates the original access medium until the individual returns the second access medium; and
( 5 ) Provides that any second access media that is also used as identification media meet the criteria of § 1542.211(b).
From: edh9494@aol.com [mailto:edh9494@aol.com] 

Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 10:16 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Parity

I am a clinical psychologist and director of a clinic which provides neurofeedback 

treatment to individuals with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Mood 

Disorders. Neurofeedback is an empirically validated and widely recognized effective 

non-medication treatment for ADHD, as well as other conditions. There are over 50 

studies evaluating the effectiveness of neurofeedback in the treatment of ADHD, 

substance use disorders and Autism. A recent review of this literature concluded 

"Neurofeedback meets the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 

criteria for Clinical Guidelines for treatment of ADHD." This means that neurofeedback 

meets the same criteria as medication for treating ADHD, of which 60% of prescriptions 

are in fact prescribed "off label," and that neurofeedback "should always be considered as 

an intervention for this disorder by the clinician." 

 

This service has been denied by Georgia Medicaid, Aetna, United Behavioral Health, 

Blue Cross, Cigna, and Amerigroup. 

 

This is limitation of an effective and validated treatment for a mental health problem. The 

reasons given by the insurance companies for this denial fell into two categories: 1) our 

company does not cover biofeedback for mental health problems or 2) there is not yet 

sufficient evidence for the efficacy of neurofeedback. As such, they are using evidencebased criteria that are far more restrictive for mental health services than the criteria 

which are used for medical/surgical services. There are many routine medical and 

surgical procedures which have far fewer controlled studies about their efficacy than does 

neurofeedback. These medical and surgical procedures are generally not limited because 

of concerns about how many controlled studies have been performed about them. 

 We believe that the parity regulations, based on legal reviews of the parity statute should 

require that employers and plans pay for the same range and scope of services for 

behavioral treatments as they do for medical surgical benefits and that a plan cannot be 

more restrictive in their managed care criteria and reviews for mental health and 

substance abuse disorders when compared to medical surgery. Today plans are being 

more restrictive in how they review evidenced-based mental health and Substance Abuse 

Treatments when compared to medical surgical treatments. This violates both the intent 

and letter of the parity statute and we hope that the regulations will clarify that this can't 

continue. 

Please feel free to contact me if additional information is desired. 

Sincerely, 

Electronically signed

Ed D. Hamlin, Ph.D.
Clinical Director

The Pisgah Institute's 

Center for the Advancement of Human Potential

30 Garfield Street, Suite D

Asheville, NC 28803

 

Tele: 828-251-2882

Fax: 828-251-4757

e-mail: ehamlin@pisgahinstitute.com

Just Two? Get Easy to Make Recipes. Sign Up - Free Email Newsletter.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, July 13, 1995 (94), Para 94.10 Recorded Vote]
[Pages 1126-1127]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.94.10  recorded vote

  A recorded vote by electronic device was ordered in the Committee of 
the Whole on the following amendment submitted by Mr. OBEY:

       Page 23, line 19, strike ``$87,000,000'' and insert 
     ``$70,220,000''.
       Page 55, line 5, strike ``$384,504,000'' and insert 
     ``$347,724,000''.
       Page 55, line 22, strike ``$151,028,000'' and insert 
     ``$124,247,000''.
       Page 66, strike lines 11 through 15 and insert the 
     following:

                        DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

              Office of Elementary and Secondary Education

                            indian education

       For necessary expenses to carry out, to the extent not 
     otherwise provided, title VI of the

[[Page 1127]]

     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, $81,341,000.

It was decided in the

Yeas

183

negative

Nays

282
```
From: mgleonard2@verizon.net [mailto:mgleonard2@verizon.net] 

Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 5:19 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 26, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Marlene Leonard 

6098 Covington Rd. 

Columbia, MD 21044
Docket: EBSA-2009-0010 

The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Comment On: EBSA-2009-0010-0409 

Interim Final Rules Under the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and 

Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Document: EBSA-2009-0010-DRAFT-0711 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-2167 

Submitter Information 

Name: Nancy Breen Lamb 

Address: 

260 Washington Ave. 

Albany, 12210 

Email: nblamb@naminys.org 

Phone: 518-462-2000 

Organization: NAMI NYS 

General Comment 

On behalf of NAMI-NYS, I am writing to submit comments on the Interim Final Rules under the 

Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 and in 

doing so NAMI-NYS endorses the separate comments submitted by the Parity Implementation 

Coalition and the National Alliance on Mental Illness” 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: May 04, 2010 

Received: May 03, 2010 

Status: DoNotPost 

Tracking No. 80ae5c6b 

Comments Due: May 03, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Page 1 of 1

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 5/4/2010
§ 178.704 General IBC standards. ( a ) Each IBC must be resistant to, or protected from, deterioration due to exposure to the external environment. IBCs intended for solid hazardous materials must be sift-proof and water-resistant.
( b ) All service equipment must be so positioned or protected as to minimize potential loss of contents resulting from damage during IBC handling and transportation.
( c ) Each IBC, including attachments, and service and structural equipment, must be designed to withstand, without loss of hazardous materials, the internal pressure of the contents and the stresses of normal handling and transport. An IBC intended for stacking must be designed for stacking. Any lifting or securing features of an IBC must be of sufficient strength to withstand the normal conditions of handling and transportation without gross distortion or failure and must be positioned so as to cause no undue stress in any part of the IBC.
( d ) An IBC consisting of a packaging within a framework must be so constructed that: ( 1 ) The body is not damaged by the framework;
( 2 ) The body is retained within the framework at all times; and
( 3 ) The service and structural equipment are fixed in such a way that they cannot be damaged if the connections between body and frame allow relative expansion or motion.
( e ) Bottom discharge valves must be secured in the closed position and the discharge system suitably protected from damage. Valves having lever closures must be secured against accidental opening. The open or closed position of each valve must be readily apparent. For each IBC containing a liquid, a secondary means of sealing the discharge aperture must also be provided, e.g., by a blank flange or equivalent device.
( f ) IBC design types must be constructed in such a way as to be bottom-lifted or top-lifted as specified in §§ 178.811 and 178.812.
[Amdt. 178-103, 59 FR 38068, July 26, 1994, as amended at 66 FR 45386, Aug. 28, 2001; 68 FR 61942, Oct. 30, 2003]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 157 (Wednesday, August 15, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45787-45791]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3985]



[[Page 45787]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal Nos. 07-45]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 
601-3740.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittals 07-45 with attached transmittal, and 
policy justification.

    Dated: August 8, 2007.
C.R. Choate,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[[Page 45788]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AU07.023


[[Page 45789]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AU07.024


[[Page 45790]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN15AU07.025

[FR Doc. 07-3985 Filed 8-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
UAV Flight Test

☐ Assemble UAV and prepare for take off

☐ Take off successfully

☐ Raise UAV to 50 feet and hover

☐ Move the UAV forward 20 feet

☐ Move the UAV backward 20 feet

☐ Move the UAV left 20 feet

☐ Move the UAV right 20 feet

☐ Initiate return to home in emergency

☐ Land UAV

☐ Explain buttons/controls on the remote

☐ Disassemble UAV and store

☐

☐

☐

☐

☐
#### Harrison Courtney, Respondent, v. Oscar L. Sumner and others, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2250

To provide for the return of economic resources for the imposition of certain

customs fees and duties to the community in which the customs fees

and duties are collected.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 4, 1995

Mr. STOCKMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To provide for the return of economic resources for the

imposition of certain customs fees and duties to the

community in which the customs fees and duties are

collected.

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 ‘‘Community Develop5 ment Act of 1995’’.

6 SEC. 2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

7 Title 19 of the United States Code is amended by

8 adding at the end thereof the following new section:
2

HR 2250 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. ll. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

2 ‘‘Not later than 90 days from the enactment of the

3 Community Development Act of 1995, the Secretary shall

4 promulgate regulations to provide for the return of 1 per

5 centum of the customs fees and duties assessed on a com6 modity under the provisions of this customs fees and du7 ties title to the port of entry, or airport of entry, that is

8 a public corporation as defined by 19 U.S.C. 81a(e) in

9 which the product was located at the time of assessment

10 of the customs fees and duties.’’.

11 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

12 The provisions of this Act shall take effect upon en13 actment.

Æ
§ 229.4 Information collection. ( a ) The information collection requirements in this part have been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Public Law 96-511, and have been assigned OMB control number 2130-0004.
( b ) The information collection requirements are found in the following sections: §§ 229.9, 229.17, 229.21, 229.23, 229.25, 229.27, 229.29, 229.31, 229.33, 229.55, 229.103, 229.105, 229.113, 229.121, 229.135, and appendix H to part 229.
[50 FR 6953, Feb. 19, 1985, as amended at 58 FR 36613, July 8, 1993; 71 FR 63136, Oct. 27, 2006]
NO. 07-03-0285-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

SEPTEMBER 4, 2003

______________________________

FLOYD HARDEMAN,

Appellant

v.

REGIONAL ISLAMIC CHAPLAIN TALIB, ET AL., 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 251ST DISTRICT COURT OF RANDALL COUNTY;

NO. 48,263-C; HON. PATRICK A. PIRTLE, PRESIDING

_______________________________

Before JOHNSON, C.J., and QUINN and REAVIS, JJ.

 Floyd Hardeman (Hardeman) appeals from an order dismissing his lawsuit against

Regional Islamic Chaplain Talib, Senior Islamic Chaplain Shabazz, Senior Warden of

Clements Unit Keith Price (individually and in his official capacity), Regional Director John

Gilbert (individually and in his official capacity), Director Gary Johnson (individually and

in his official capacity), Chairman of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Allan

Polunsky (individually and in his official capacity), and Clements Unit Senior Chaplain

Murphy Rory (individually and in his official capacity). We dismiss the appeal for lack of
2

jurisdiction. 

On May 8, 2000, and July 24, 2000, the trial court signed separate orders

dismissing Hardeman’s suit against all of the defendants. He subsequently filed a notice

of appeal on February 13, 2003, wherein he asserted that he was appealing from a

dismissal order signed on or about January 24, 2003. The clerk’s record before us does

not reflect the order mentioned in the notice exists. Thus, we contacted Hardeman, via

letter dated August 11, 2003, and advised him of this situation. We also directed him to

inform us of why we had jurisdiction over his appeal, which response was due no later than

August 21, 2003. To date, a response has not been received.

To be timely and depending upon various circumstances, a notice of appeal must

be filed within 30 or 90 days after a final order disposing of the case is signed. TEX. R.

APP.P. 26.1(a). Here, approximately two and one-half years lapsed between the dates on

which the trial court signed the dismissal orders disposing of the case and the date on

which the notice of appeal was filed. Because a timely notice of appeal is essential to

invoke our appellate jurisdiction, In re A.L.B., 56 S.W.3d 651, 652 (Tex. App.--Waco 2003,

no pet.), and Hardeman did not file one, we cannot but dismiss the appeal. Id. 

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 

Per Curiam
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

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

July 14, 2015

Order 

July 14, 2015

151241(20)(21)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v

JERRY WAYNE SMITH,

Defendant-Appellant.

SC: 151241

COA: 324637

Washtenaw CC: 78-012931-FC

________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motions of defendant-appellant to extend the 

time for filing his reply and to exceed the page limitation of the reply are GRANTED. 

The 17-page reply submitted on July 2, 2015, is accepted for filing.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    Exhibit (11)
                             WALL STREET DELI, INC.
                    COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
                                  (Unaudited)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                         For the Three Months Ended 
                                                   September 28, 1996    September 30, 1995
                                                   ------------------    ------------------
 <S>                                                    <C>                   <C>         
 SHARES:                                                                                  
                                                                                          
    Weighted average number of common shares                                              
    outstanding                                          3,410,368             3,468,745  
                                                                                          
    Effect of shares issuable under stock option                                          
    plan as determined by the treasury stock                                              
    method                                                   3,411                 4,964                                 
                                                         ---------            ----------  
    Weighted average number of common and                                                 
    common equivalent share outstanding                  3,413,779             3,473,709  
                                                                                          
 PER COMMON SHARE COMPUTATIONS:                                                           
                                                                                          
    Net income                                          $  228,343            $   17,454  
                                                        ==========            ==========  
                                                                                          
    Earnings per share                                  $     . 07            $     . 01  
                                                        ==========            ==========  
                                                       
</TABLE>




                                      29