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 Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - [I.D. 050107D]

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice of a public meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) Aleutian Island (AI) Ecosystem Committee will meet in Seattle, WA.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on May 21, 2007, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Alaska Fisheries Science Center, 7600 Sand Point Way NE. Bldg 4, Room 2076, Traynor Room, Seattle, WA 98115.

*Council address*: North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Diana Evans, Council staff, telephone: (907) 271-2809.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The agenda is to discuss the AI Fishery                           ( print page 25268)                        Ecosystem Plan, and develop recommendations for the Council.                

## Special Accommodations

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Gail Bendixen at (907) 271-2809 at least 7 working days prior to the meeting date.

Dated: May 1, 2007.

Tracey L. Thompson,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. E7-8545 Filed 5-3-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
Exhibit 32.1   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002    In connection with the Report of Competitive Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Johnnie D. Johnson, 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 results of operations of the Company.   /s/ Johnnie D. Johnson Johnnie D. Johnson Chief Executive Officer  August 20, 2012  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Competitive Technologies and will be retained by Competitive Technologies and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of

ARTHUR P. FISCH

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2882 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 69 DB 2022

(Supreme Court of New York, Appellate 

Division: Second Judicial Department, 

No. 2015-05262)

Attorney Registration No. 22170

(Out of State)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 28th day of July, 2022, having failed to respond to a Notice and 

Order directing him to provide reasons against the imposition of reciprocal discipline, 

Arthur P. Fisch is disbarred from the practice of law in the Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania. He shall comply with all provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                         220,014
<SECURITIES>                                   392,997
<RECEIVABLES>                                   79,915
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,000)
<INVENTORY>                                     11,377
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               714,086
<PP&E>                                       7,803,410
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,504,196
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,082,485
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          471,067
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       791,782
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,082,485
<SALES>                                        242,806
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,138,396
<CGS>                                          129,065
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  992,328
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             103,416
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                146,068
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,377
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            141,691
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   141,691
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
#### Wilbur Ellis Company *v.*United States

No. 8030.

Entered at Los Angeles, Calif.

Entry No. 3773.

(Decided July 19, 1951)

*Lawrence, Tuttle & Harper (George R. Tuttle*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*David,*17. *Hdelstein,*Assistant Attorney General *(Charles J. Wagner,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Fokd, Judge:

The merchandise covered by the appeal listed above consists of 35 cases of ajinomoto which were entered at the port of Los Angeles, Calif., at a value of $76 per case, and the total was extended as $266. Of course, the total should have been extended as $2,660 instead of $266, but since I am interested here only in the unit of quantity in which the merchandise is usually bought and sold, and not in the total value, this fact is immaterial.

When this appeal was called for trial, counsel for the respective parties stipulated that $54 per case, packed, was the correct export value, and that there was no higher foreign value.

Accepting the above stipulation as a statement of fact, I find the proper dutiable export value of the involved merchandise to be $54 per case, packed. However, attention is invited to section 503 (a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, which provides that “* * * the basis for the assessment of duties on imported merchandise subject to ad valorem rates of duty shall be the entered value or the final appraised value, whichever is higher.” Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
### Water levels and artesian pressure in observation wells in the United States, 1941, Part 5, Northwestern States

By: Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp940

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
[NOT FOR PUBLICATION--NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]



# United Stat es Court of Appeals

For the First C ircuit

No. 01-2734 UNITED STATES, Plaintiff, Appellee,

v. TWENTY ONE ITEMS VALUED AT $24,663.12; TAG NO. BFX 264; TAG NO. BDS 136,

Defendants,

_____________________ ALFONSO CARDONA-ARREDONDO, Claimant, Appellant.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Jaime Pieras, Jr., U.S. District Judge ]
Before Boudin, Chief Judge , Torruella and Howard, Circuit Judges . Alfonso Cardona Arredondo on brief pro se. Guillermo Gil , United States Attorney, and Jose Javier Santos Mimoso , Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.
November 7, 2002-2-

Per Curiam . As the government argues, claimant's attempt to
recover interest on funds and property which the government ha d seizedwhen claimant was arrested but which were ultimately returnedto him is barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity as explainedin a decision issued during the pendency of this appeal. Larson v. United States , 274 F.3d 643 (1 st Cir. 2001); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2465. The version of the statute in effect when th is proceeding was commenced did not permit an award of any interest. Id. at 647. Although a new version of the statute now provides for the recovery of interest, the new version applies prospectively only. Id. Cla imant's argument that we previously mandated an award of interest to him when we remanded the matter to the district court is based on a misapprehension of the remand order (which permitted the district court to explore anew the question of interest) and a misunderstanding of the doctrine of sove reig n immunity. Since sovereign immunity deprives the federal court of jurisdiction, it may be raised at any time during the proceedings regardless of prior orders in the case and regardless of a party's failure to object on that ground. Id. at 648. Claimant's arguments regarding his motion for the return of an automobile which was not registered in his name, and his attempt to obtain sanctions against the government are frivolous. The judgment is affirmedfor the reasons stated above.
141 Prosperous Place, Suite 26  ̃ P.O. Box 23220  ̃ Lexington, KY 40523 

(859) 252-3445  ̃ fax (859) 245-2941  ̃ http://dennisbadger.com 

Dennis Badger & Associates, Inc. is an Equal Opportunity Employer 

November 30, 2012 

Mr. Peter Gillispie 

Appraisal Subcommittee 

1401 H Street, NW, Suite 760 

Washington, DC 20005 

RE: Proposed Policy Statements (Docket No. AS12-16) follow-up comment 

Mr. Gillispie and Members of the Appraisal Subcommittee: 

Once again, I sincerely appreciate the opportunity you have afforded the public comment on the 

proposed Policy Statements. While I understand the official comment period has expired, I 

would like to offer one additional, minor suggestion for increased clarity and understandability. 

 

In the proposed section entitled, “Policy Statement 1, D. Federally Recognized Appraiser 

Classifications, 3. Trainee Appraiser and Supervisory Appraiser,” it states: 

“Any State or Federal agency may impose additional appraiser qualification requirements 

for State licensed, certified residential or certified general classifications, or for trainee 

and supervisor classifications, if they consider such requirements necessary to carry out 

their responsibilities under Federal and/or State statutes and regulations, so long as the 

additional qualification requirements do not conflict with AQB Criteria.” [emphasis 

added] 

In order to avoid future debates over meaning and intent of the term “conflict,” perhaps an 

alternate word or phrase, such as, “preclude compliance” would be more direct? 

A similar substitution may also be beneficial in the section entitled “Policy Statement 1, F. 

Appraisal Standards” where it states: 

“Any State or Federal agency may impose additional appraisal standards if they consider 

such standards necessary to carry out their responsibilities, so long as additional appraisal 

standards do not conflict with USPAP for work performed for federally related 

transactions.” [emphasis added] 

Again, thank you for your time and consideration. 

Respectfully, 

Dennis Badger
**ME MORA**  **NDUM**

**FROM** Steven Silverman, Attorney **TO** : HD GHG Rulemaking Docket **RE:** Meeting with Matt Nelson staff of US Senator Diane Feinstein

On August 5, 2011 EPA staff members and NHTSA staff members including project manager By ron Bunker met with Matt Nelson from the staff of Senator Diane Feinstein. The subject of the meeting was to discuss the letter from the authors and supporters of the ten

- in

- ten legislation submitted to EPA and NHTSA during the rulemaking comment period. W e pointed out that the letter was being dealt with as a public comment and was being addressed, point by point, in the preamble and response to comment document to the final rule. W e also provided certain technical information related to questions posed in the letter (e.g. cou pled cam phasing is part of the baseline for the heavy

- duty pickup and van fleet, so the technology is accounted for in the standards; regulation of trailers raises difficult polic y and technical questions and in any case was explicitly not proposed as part of this rulemaking,). Wealso discussed the possibility of consumer labels, noting the differences in labels for class 2b/3 vehicles and heavier trucks.

From: Steven Silverman/DC/USEPA/US To: Byron Bunker/AA/USEPA/US@EPA, Angela Cullen/AA/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 08/07/2011 04:56 PM Subject: memo to record
please add the following to our HD docket and fill in various blanks and otherwise adding anything you wish? thks!

MEMORANDUM FROM Steven Silverman, Attorney TO: HD GHG Rulem aking Docket RE: Meeting with (staff of Senator Diane Feinstein)

On August 5, 2011 EPA staff members and NHTSA staff members including project manager By ron Bunker) met with Matt from the staff of Sen. Diane Feinstein. The subject of the meeting was to discuss the joint letter of various senators submitted to EPA and NHTSA during the rulemaking comment period. W e pointed out that the letter was being dealt with as a public comment and was being addressed, point by point, in the pre am ble and response to comment document to the final rule. W e also provided certain technical information related to questions posed in the letter (e.g. coupled cam phasing is part of the baseline for the heavy duty fleet, so the technology is accounted fo r in the standards; regulation of trailers raises difficult polic y and technical questions and in any case was explicitly not proposed as part of this rulemaking,). Wealso discussed the possibility of consumer labels, noting the differences in labels for class 2b/3 vehicles and heavier trucks.
No. 54900.

#### Crompton-Richmond Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 162344-K (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

When the case was called for trial there was no appearance on the part of the plaintiff. Counsel for the Government moved to dismiss the protest on the ground that it was untimely. An examination of the official papers revealed that more than 60 days elapsed between the date of liquidation of the entry and the date of the filing of protest. The protest was therefore dismissed as untimely.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, January 03, 2017.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, January 03, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17A0566. ANTHONY LEE, SR. et al. v. JOHN JUSTICE et al..

The appellant in this case failed to comply with the notice of docketing mailed by this 

Court and with Court of Appeals Rules 22 (a) and 23 (a), regarding the filing of an enumeration 

of errors and brief within twenty days after the appeal was docketed. See also Court of Appeals 

Rule 13.

On November 23, 2016, this Court ordered the appellant to file an enumeration of errors 

and a brief no later than December 02, 2016. As of the date of this order, the appellant's 

enumeration of errors and brief still have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is deemed 

abandoned and is hereby ordered DISMISSED. Court of Appeals Rules 7, 23 (a).
# C_2019255EN.01003001.xml

| 29.7.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 255/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.7.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 255/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 5 June 2019 — Bank Saderat v Council

(Case T-433/15) (1)

(Non-contractual liability - Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures against Iran - Freezing of funds - Restriction on admission to the territory of the Member States - Compensation for the damage allegedly sustained by the applicant following its inclusion and re-inclusion in the list of persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures at issue - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)

(2019/C 255/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Bank Saderat plc (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Jeffrey, S. Ashley, A. Irvine, Solicitors, M. Demetriou QC, and R. Blakeley, Barrister)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: initially M. Bishop and N. Rouam, and subsequently M. Bishop and H. Marcos Fraile, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially M. Konstantinidis and D. Gauci, and subsequently M. Konstantinidis, A. Tizzano and C. Zadra, Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 268 TFEU for compensation for the damage allegedly sustained by the applicant as a result of the inclusion of its name on the list of designated persons and entities in Council Regulation (EC) No 423/2007 of 19 April 2007 concerning restrictive measures against Iran (OJ 2007 L 103, p. 1), Council Regulation (EU) No 961/2010 of 25 October 2010 on restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation No 423/2007 (OJ 2010 L 281, p. 1), and Council Regulation (EU) No 267/2012 of 23 March 2012 concerning restrictive measures against Iran and repealing Regulation No 961/2010 (OJ 2012 L 88, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Bank Saderat plc to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Bank Saderat plc to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs

---

(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2015.

---
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 373 

Authorizing Frank Woodruff Buckles to lie in honor in the rotunda of the 

Capitol upon his death. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 18, 2008 

Mrs. CAPITO (for herself and Mr. BUYER) submitted the following concurrent 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Authorizing Frank Woodruff Buckles to lie in honor in the 

rotunda of the Capitol upon his death. 

Whereas the veterans of the First World War fought bravely 

and made heroic sacrifices for the Allied forces; and 

Whereas past resolutions have sought authorization for 

American heroes to lie in honor in the rotunda of the 

Capitol upon an individual’s passing, it is the Nation’s 

collective desire to express its gratitude for the service of 

all World War I veterans by making it known to that 

war’s last American survivor the honor it wishes to bestow on him before he passes: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HCON 373 IH 

1 SECTION 1. HONORING FRANK WOODRUFF BUCKLES. 

2 (a) IN GENERAL.—In recognition of the historic con3 tributions of United States veterans who served in the 

4 First World War, Frank Woodruff Buckles, the last sur5 viving United States veteran of the First World War, shall 

6 be permitted to lie in honor in the rotunda of the Capitol 

7 upon his death, so that the citizens of the United States 

8 may pay their last respects to this great American. 

9 (b) IMPLEMENTATION.—The Architect of the Capitol, 

10 under the direction and supervision of the President pro 

11 tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of 

12 Representatives, shall take the necessary steps to imple13 ment subsection (a). 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Scientific Research and Development in American Industry: A Study of Manpower and Costs

              																	Wood, Helen					 and 	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Scientific Research and Development in American Industry: A Study of Manpower and Costs : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 1148*,												Washington: 								U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 										1953,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4465,			accessed on September 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER