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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Veterans Affairs

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Advisory Committee on CARES Business Plan Studies has scheduled a meeting for September 6, 2007, at the West Los Angeles Campus of the Greater Los Angeles Health Care System, in the Wadsworth Theater, 11301 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, California. The meeting will convene at 5 p.m. and conclude at 9 p.m. The meeting is open to the public.

The purpose of the Committee is to provide advice to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs on proposed business plans at those VA facility sites identified in May 2004 as requiring further study by the Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services (CARES) Decision document.

The objective of this meeting is to provide the Secretary with advice regarding the final selection of a capital planning option to modernize the West Los Angeles campus of the Greater Los Angeles Health Care System. An analysis of the capital planning options completed by the VA contractor is to be presented at the meeting prior to their final submission to the VA. The agenda will also accommodate public commentary on the options.

                    Interested persons may attend and present oral or written statements to the Committee. For additional information regarding the meeting, please contact Mr. Jay Halpern, Designated Federal                           ( print page 46533)                        Officer, (00 CARES), at 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, by phone at (202) 273-5994, or by e-mail at                     *jay.halpern@va.gov.*

Dated: August 13, 2007.

By Direction of the Secretary.

E. Philip Riggin,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 07-4046 Filed 8-17-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320-01-M
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, November 7, 1995 (141), Para 141.33 Fats and Oils Differentiation]
[Page 1879]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.141.33  fats and oils differentiation

  On motion of Mr. BILBRAY, by unanimous consent, the bill (H.R. 436) to 
require the head of any Federal agency to differentiate between fats, 
oils, and greases of animal, marine, or vegetable origin, and other oils 
and greases, in issuing certain regulations, and for other purposes; 
together with the following amendments of the Senate thereto, was taken 
from the Speaker's table:

       Page 2, line 8, after ``to'' insert: ``the transportation, 
     storage, discharge, release, emission, or disposal of''.
       Page 2, line 9, strike out ``any'' the second time it 
     appears and insert ``that''.
       Page 2, line 18, strike out ``such'' and insert ``that''.
       Page 2, line 22, strike out ``different'' the first time it 
     appears.
       Page 2, line 23, strike out ``as provided'' and insert: 
     ``based on considerations''.
       Page 3, line 12, strike out ``carrying oil in bulk as cargo 
     or cargo residue''.
       Page 3, line 13, after ``carried'' insert ``as cargo''.

  On motion of Mr. BILBRAY, said Senate amendments were agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider the vote whereby said Senate amendments were 
agreed to was, by unanimous consent, laid on the table.
  Ordered, That the Clerk notify the Senate thereof.
```
§ 234.273 Results of inspections and tests. ( a ) Results of inspections and tests made in compliance with this part shall be recorded on forms provided by the railroad, or by electronic means, subject to approval by the Associate Administrator for Safety. Each record shall show the name of the railroad, AAR/DOT inventory number, place and date, equipment tested, results of tests, repairs, replacements, adjustments made, and condition in which the apparatus was left.
( b ) Each record shall be signed or electronically coded by the employee making the test and shall be filed in the office of a supervisory official having jurisdiction. Records required to be kept shall be made available to FRA as provided by 49 U.S.C. 20107 (formerly § 208 of the Federal Railroad Safety Act of 1970 (45 U.S.C. 437)).
( c ) Each record shall be retained until the next record for that test is filed but in no case for less than one year from the date of the test.
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 5/27/15 8:21 AM

Received: May 18, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8ixc-m5gl

Comments Due: July 06, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0204

Definition of the Term Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-0285

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-08831

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

I am in favor o this rule and believe that those providing retirement accounts should act in the 

best interest of the customer and not the financial institution offering the largest incentive to the 

broker. 

Page 1 of 1

https://www.fdms.gov/fdms/getcontent?objectId=0900006481ae7479&format=xml&show... 5/27/2015
* 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. 97-10122

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

VINCENT ROCHEL LEWIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:94-CV-184

- - - - - - - - - -

August 4, 1998

Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Federal prisoner Vincent Rochel Lewis, no. 60694-079,

appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255

motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. 

Lewis contends that he received ineffective assistance of

counsel when his attorney failed to file an appeal of his

sentence. Lewis also contends that he received ineffective

assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to object to the

district court’s use of incriminating information in violation of
No. 97-10122

-2-

U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8 to calculate Lewis’ sentence. The magistrate

judge found credible counsel’s testimony at an evidentiary

hearing that Lewis never requested an appeal. See United States

v. Nixon, 881 F.2d 1305, 1310 (5th Cir. 1989). Also, because the

Government never made any agreement such that § 1B1.8 would apply

to Lewis’ case, any objection on that ground would have been

meritless. See Clark v. Collins, 19 F.3d 959, 966 (5th Cir.

1994). Lewis cannot demonstrate that his attorney rendered

deficient performance. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S.

668, 687 (1984).

To the extent that Lewis raises an independent issue that

the district court erred by using information prohibited by

§ 1B1.8 to calculate his sentence, it is not a constitutional

issue cognizable under § 2255. See United States v. Segler, 37

F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 1994). Even if the issue was

cognizable, it is without merit.

Lewis does not argue on appeal his issues: 1) that he

received ineffective assistance of counsel during plea

bargaining: 2) that the trial court committed errors by failing

to inform him of the nature of the charges and the core concerns

of pleading guilty: 3) that the trial court erred by not advising

Lewis of the contents of the plea agreement; and 4) that the

sentencing court violated several other sentencing guidelines

when sentencing him. Because Lewis failed to argue these issues,

they are considered abandoned. See United States v. Madkins, 14
No. 97-10122

-3-

F.3d 277, 279 n.3 (5th Cir. 1994).

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification of Chief Executive Officer**

Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

Created by Section 906

of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

The undersigned officer of FileNet Corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

 (i)          the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal period ended March 31, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:  May 9, 2006
| */s/ Lee D. Roberts*** |
|------------------------|

Lee D. Roberts 

Chairman of the Board and

Chief Executive Officer
§ 245.411 Appeals. ( a ) Any party aggrieved by the presiding officer's decision may file an appeal in the presiding officer's docket. The appeal must be filed within 35 days of issuance of the decision. A copy of the appeal shall be served on each party. The appeal shall set forth objections to the presiding officer's decision, supported by reference to applicable laws and regulations and with specific reference to the record. If no appeal is timely filed, the presiding officer's decision constitutes final agency action.
( b ) A party may file a reply to the appeal within 25 days of service of the appeal. The reply shall be supported by reference to applicable laws and regulations and with specific reference to the record, if the party relies on evidence contained in the record.
( c ) The Administrator may extend the period for filing an appeal or a reply for good cause shown, provided that the written request for extension is served before expiration of the applicable period provided in this section.
( d ) The Administrator has sole discretion to permit oral argument on the appeal. On the Administrator's own initiative or written motion by any party, the Administrator may grant the parties an opportunity for oral argument.
( e ) The Administrator may remand, vacate, affirm, reverse, alter, or modify the decision of the presiding officer and the Administrator's decision constitutes final agency action except where the terms of the Administrator's decision (for example, remanding a case to the presiding officer) show that the parties' administrative remedies have not been exhausted.
( f ) An appeal from a Board decision pursuant to § 245.403(e) must be filed in the Board's docket within 35 days of issuance of the decision. A copy of the appeal shall be served on each party. The Administrator may affirm or vacate the Board's decision, and may remand the petition to the Board for further proceedings. An Administrator's decision to affirm the Board's decision constitutes final agency action.
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AS OF JUNE 30, 1997 AND FROM THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE SIX
MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         953,681
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  220,995
<ALLOWANCES>                                    96,532
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                       8,654,464
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,247,206
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                      6,803,457
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,987,412
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,247,206
<SALES>                                      1,656,152
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,675,220
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,175,872
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                14,552
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             266,451
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                132,691
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            132,691
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   132,691
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>THE PARTNERSHIP HAS AN UNCLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET; THEREFORE, THE VALUE IS $0.
<F2>THIS INFORMATION IS NOT DISCLOSED IN THE PARTNERSHIP'S FORM 10-Q FILING.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### § 210.9 Movement of a noise defective locomotive, rail car, or consist of a locomotive and rail cars.

A locomotive, rail car, or consist of a locomotive and rail cars that is noise defective may be moved no farther than the nearest forward facility where the noise defective conditions can be eliminated only after the locomotive, rail car, or consist of a locomotive and rail cars has been inspected and been determined to be safe to move.
-----Original Message----- 

From: darcybergh@gmail.com [mailto:darcybergh@gmail.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 12:02 AM 

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, 

Darcy Bergh 

1719 28th St. 

San Diego, CA 92102
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: 7/19/15 11:27 AM

Received: July 14, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jys-hldp

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; 

Notice of proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related 

Proposed Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-2227

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

This (EBSA) proposed rule makes investing more expensive and reduces consumer choices. It 

amounts to unwarranted government invasion into our investment accounts. Each of us should be 

able to choose our own retirement accounts without the tenets of this rule.
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, 

Gayle M. Montgomery 

P. O. Box 1851 

Monrovia, CA 91017
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Friday, September 29, 1995 (123), Para 123.8 Messages from the President]
[Page 1473]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.123.8  messages from the president

  Sundry messages in writing from the President of the United States 
were communicated to the House by Mr. Edwin Thomas, one of his 
secretaries.
```
-----Original Message----- 

From: pmarsh1@san.rr.com [mailto:pmarsh1@san.rr.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 12:11 AM 

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, 

Paul R. Marsh 

6837 Lanewood Ct. 

San Diego, CA 92111
#### § 236.745 Face, locking.

The locking surface of a locking dog, tappet or cross locking of an interlocking machine.
**EXHIBIT
23.2**
 
 
 
 **PENNSYLVANIA
POWER COMPANY**
 
 **CONSENT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
 
 We hereby consent
to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3
(No. 33-62450 and 33-65156) of Pennsylvania Power Company of our report dated
March 7, 2005 relating to the consolidated financial statements, management’s
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and
the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in
the Annual Report to Stockholders, which is incorporated in this Annual Report
on Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by reference of our report
dated March 7, 2005 relating to the financial statement schedules, which appears
in this Form 10-K.
 
 
 
 PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
 
 Cleveland,
Ohio
 March 7,
2005
-----Original Message----- 

From: larryrmartin@msn.com [mailto:larryrmartin@msn.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 2:02 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 27, 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, 

Larry Martin 

230 Foothills Lane 

Morgantownw, WV 26508
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Friday, October 6, 1995 (124), Para 124.2 Approval of the Journal]
[Page 1494]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.124.2  approval of the journal

  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mrs. MORELLA, announced she had examined and 
approved the Journal of the proceedings of Friday, September 29, 1995.
  Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal was approved.
```
From: Lance Turner [mailto:lance@rosettafinancial.com] 

Sent: Friday, June 19, 2015 5:54 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32

To Whom It May Concern:

The assumptions on which the referenced proposed policy changes for the financial advisory 

business are based are not only flatly wrong, they’re offensive. It’s shameful that you degrade 

an entire industry this way. If these changes are passed it will cause harm to millions of taxpaying entrepreneurs who work as financial advisors and their clients who benefit from their 

advisors’ advice and guidance.

We are one of the heaviest regulated industries already and these additional proposed changes 

are as unnecessary as they are harmful.

Lance Turner, CFP®, CFS

Rosetta Financial Advisors, Inc.

Two City Place Drive, Suite 200

St. Louis, Missouri 63141

Phone 314-517-7601

Fax 314-567-3005

lance@rosettafinancial.com

www.rosettafinancial.com

Securities offered through Cambridge Investment Research, Inc., a Broker/Dealer, Member FINRA/SIPC. Investment Advisor 

Representative, Cambridge Investment Research Advisors, Inc., a Registered Investment Advisor. Cambridge and Rosetta 

Financial Advisors are not affiliated.

The information in this email is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended addressee and have 

received this email in error, please reply to the sender to inform them of this fact.

We cannot accept trade orders through e-mail. Important letters, e-mail, or fax messages should be confirmed by calling 

314-614-5666. This email service may not be monitored every day, or after normal business hours.
1 ... SeeTex. R. A pp. P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OFAPPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOF TEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2 - 09 - 16 3- CV Q ' SO, I NC . , AM Y ARN O L DT, AN D APPE L L AN TS F R E DR I CKAR NOL DT V . C A PI TA L ON E, N . A . A PPELL EE

----- ----- FR O M THE 3 42ND D I STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

----- ----- 

### MEMORANDU M OPI NI ON 1 

### AND J UDGME NT

----- ----- W e h a v e c o n s i d e re d “ A p p e l l a n ts ’ M o t io n T o D i s m i s s .”I t i sth e c o u rt’s o p in io n t h a tt h e m o t io n s h o u ld b e g r a n t e d ; t h e r e f o r e , w e d i s m i s s t h e a p p e a l. S eeT e x . R . A p p . P . 4 2 .1 (a )(1 ), 4 3 .2 (f). C os t s oft he app ea l s hal l bepa i d byt he part y i ncur r i ng t he sa m e, f or w h i c h l e t e x e c u ti o n i s s u e . See Tex. R. A pp. P. 43. 4. P E RCU R I AM PA N EL: M EI ER, LI V I N G STO N , an d W A LKER, JJ. DEL I VERE D: J un e 18, 2009
Extract From the Annual Action of the Stockholder of
              Ohio Edison Company dated September 27, 1999

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


          RESOLVED:  The sole shareholder amends the Code of Regulations of
the Company to read as follows:

          Article 10 is amended by deleting the second paragraph of such
Article.

          Article 11 is amended by changing the minimum number of Directors
from "thirteen" to "three."

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

          I, Edward J. Udovich, Assistant Corporate Secretary of Ohio Edison
Company do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of
resolutions duly adopted by the Board of Directors of Ohio Edison Company,
and that said resolutions have not since been rescinded but are still in full
force and effect

          Executed as of this 23rd day of February 2000.




                                   -----------------------------
                                   Assistant Corporate Secretary