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

[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 164 (Monday, August 25, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44948-44949]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22409]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-403-801]

Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon From Norway; Notice of 
Termination of New Shipper Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of termination of New Shipper Review.

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

SUMMARY: On May 28, 1997, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published in the Federal Register (62 FR 28840) a notice announcing the 
initiation of a new shipper antidumping duty administrative review of 
the antidumping duty order on fresh and chilled Atlantic salmon from 
Norway, covering the period November 1, 1996, through April 30, 1997, 
and one manufacturer/exporter of the subject merchandise, Nornir Group 
A/S (Nornir). This review has now been terminated as a result of the 
withdrawal of the request for administrative review by the interested 
party.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 25, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Peterson or Thomas Futtner, 
Office of AD/CVD Enforcement, Group II, Import Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20230, telephone: (202) 482-4195 or 482-3814, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On April 30, 1997, Nornir requested a new shipper review of its 
U.S. sales of subject merchandise. On May 28, 1997, in accordance with 
19 CFR Sec. 353.22h(6), we initiated the administrative review of this 
order for the period November 1, 1996, through April 30, 1997. On July 
7, 1997, the respondent, Nornir, withdrew its request for review.

[[Page 44949]]

Termination of Review

    The respondents withdrew their requests within the time limit 
provided by the Department's regulations at 19 CFR Sec. 
353.22(a)(5)(1996). Therefore, the Department is terminating this 
review.
    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility 
concerning disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO 
in accordance with section 353.34(d) of the Department's regulations. 
Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO 
materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO 
is a sanctionable violation.
    This notice is published in accordance with 19 CFR Sec. 
353.22(a)(5).

    Dated: August 14, 1997.
Jeffrey P. Bialos,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-22409 Filed 8-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
```
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1689 

To state the policy of the United States on international taxation. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 

Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. SANTORUM, and Mr. COBURN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations 

A BILL 

To state the policy of the United States on international 

taxation. 

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

3 SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF UNITED STATES POLICY ON 

4 INTERNATIONAL TAXATION. 

5 (a) UNITED STATES POLICY.— 

6 (1) IN GENERAL.—It is the policy of the United 

7 States to use the voice, vote, and influence of the 

8 United States to vigorously oppose any international 

9 or global tax that is or may be considered or pro10 moted by the United Nations, its specialized or af-
2 

•S 1689 IS

1 filiated agencies, or its Member States, or by non2 governmental organizations recognized by the United 

3 Nations. 

4 (2) EXCEPTION.—The policy in paragraph (1) 

5 shall not apply to fees for publications or other types 

6 of fees that are not tantamount to a tax on a United 

7 States person. 

8 (b) EFFORTS REGARDING POLICY.—The United 

9 States Representatives to the United Nations shall— 

10 (1) use the voice, vote, and influence of the 

11 United States to vigorously oppose any effort by the 

12 United Nations, or any specialized or affiliated agen13 cy of the United Nations, to fund, approve, advo14 cate, or promote any proposal concerning the imposi15 tion of a tax or fee on any United States person in 

16 order to raise revenue for the United Nations or any 

17 such agency; and 

18 (2) declare that a United States person shall 

19 not be subject to any international tax, and shall not 

20 be required to pay such tax if such tax is levied 

21 against such person. 

22 (c) PERSON DEFINED.—In this section, the term 

23 ‘‘person’’ has the meaning given such term in section 
3 

•S 1689 IS

1 7701(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 

2 U.S.C. 7701(a)(1)). 

Æ
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-2272

___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v. Jose Martin Morales lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota

____________ Submitted: December 2, 2021 Filed: December 7, 2021 [Unpublished]

____________ Before COLLOTON, BENTON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. Jose Martin Morales appeals after he pled guilty to a drug offense, and the district court 1 imposed an enhanced sentence pursuant to 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A)

1 The Honorable Susan Richard Nelson, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.and 851. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief under

Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that § 851 enhancements are generally arbitrarily and unjustly applied; and as applied to Morales specifically, the enhancement is unfair. To the extent counsel raises issues relating exclusively to policy or fairness, Morales is without recourse in this direct appeal. We conclude, moreover, the enhancement was properly applied because Morales had a prior “serious violent felony,” his status as an aider or abetter notwithstanding; and the sentence imposed was not substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Oliver , 987 F.3d 794, 805 (8th Cir. 2021) (reviewing factual findings regarding application of § 851 enhancement for clear error and legal determinations de novo); United States v. Feemster , 572 F.3d 455, 461–62, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (reviewing sentences first for significant procedural error, then for substantive reasonableness under abuse-of-discretion standard); cf. United States v. Gammell , 932 F.3d 1175, 1179–80 (8th Cir. 2019), cert. denied , 140 S. Ct. 2809 (2020) (noting an aiding and abetting conviction is one way to prove a defendant was guilty of a substantive offense which qualifies as a violent felony). We reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988) and found no non-frivolous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion and affirm.

______________________________

-2-
# DLA members learn to communicate using ASL

/ Published Nov. 17, 2016
FORT BELVOIR, Virginia,
**EXHIBIT
24**





**POWER
OF ATTORNEY**





KNOW ALL
MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that each of the undersigned, being a director or officer
of State Bancorp, Inc., a New York corporation (the "Company"), hereby
constitutes and appoints Brian K. Finneran, Theresa DiVittorio and Mary Ann P.
DiLorenzo, and each of them, his or her true and lawful attorney-in-fact and
agent, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him or her and in
his or her name, place and stead in any and all capacities, to sign one or more
Annual Reports for the Company's fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, on Form
10-K under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or such other form
as any such attorney-in-fact may deem necessary or desirable, any amendments
thereto, and all additional amendments thereto, each in such form as they or any
one of them may approve, and to file the same with all exhibits thereto and
other documents in connection therewith with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them,
full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing
requisite and necessary to be done so that such Annual Report shall comply with
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the applicable Rules and
Regulations adopted or issued pursuant thereto, as fully and to all intents and
purposes as he or she might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and
confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them or their
substitute or resubstitute, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.





IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has hereunto set his or her hand this 15 day of
February, 2005.





Date:2/15/05
    s/Thomas
      F. Goldrick, Jr.Thomas
      F. Goldrick, Jr.Date:2/15/05
    s/J.
      Robert BlumenthalJ.
      Robert BlumenthalDate:2/15/05
    s/Thomas
      E. ChristmanThomas
      E. ChristmanDate:2/15/05
    s/Arthur
      Dulik, Jr.Arthur
      Dulik, Jr.Date:2/15/05
    s/K.
      Thomas LiawK.
      Thomas LiawDate:2/15/05
    s/Gerard
      J. McKeonGerard
      J. McKeonDate:2/15/05
    s/Richard
      W. MerzbacherRichard
      W. MerzbacherDate:2/15/05
    s/Joseph
      F. MunsonJoseph
      F. MunsonDate:2/15/05
    s/John
      F. PiccianoJohn
      F. PiccianoDate:2/15/05
    s/Daniel
      T. RoweDaniel
      T. RoweDate:2/15/05
    s/Suzanne
      H. RueckSuzanne
      H. RueckDate:2/15/05
    s/Andrew
      J. SimonsAndrew
      J. SimonsDate:2/15/05
    s/Jeffrey
      S. WilksJeffrey
      S. Wilks
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          Jul-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                              Aug-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               Jul-31-2000
<CASH>                                       1,574,611
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  695,139
<ALLOWANCES>                                    33,018
<INVENTORY>                                  1,239,665
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,534,789
<PP&E>                                         226,664
<DEPRECIATION>                                 117,770
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,663,315
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          644,429
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,032
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,012,854
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,663,315
<SALES>                                      8,014,576
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,081,196
<CGS>                                        5,952,933
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,331,259
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,727
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 7,200
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                731,010
<INCOME-TAX>                                   291,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            440,010
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   440,010
<EPS-BASIC>                                      $1.69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $1.69



</TABLE>
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Clyde FREEMAN.

No. 60960.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 23, 1977.

In re: Clyde Freeman applying for supervisory writs.

Granted; Order of trial judge vacated; the trial judge is ordered to reconsider the matter in light of the alternatives available in C.Cr.P. 900, and to assign written reasons for the decision per *Morrissey v. Brewer,*408 U.S. 471, at 489, 92 S.Ct. 2593, 33 L.Ed.2d 484.
Exhibit 24(a)











POWER OF ATTORNEY








KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that the undersigned director of CULP, INC., a North Carolina corporation, hereby constitutes and appoints KENNETH R. BOWLING the true and lawful agent and attorney-in-fact to sign for the undersigned as a director of the Corporation the Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended May 1, 2011 to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Washington, D.C., under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and to sign any amendment or amendments to such Annual Report, hereby ratifying and confirming all acts taken by such agent and attorney-in-fact, as herein authorized.








/s/
Patrick B. FlavinPatrick B. Flavin








Date:  July 15, 2011
Login|Contact Us|I Am...

|  |
|--|

                    -  					Home  ▼ 
                    -  					About NGA  ▼                        -  							Leadership 
                      -  							Organization 
                      -  							NGA Strategy 
                      -  							History 
                      -  							Ombudsman 
                      -  							Inspector General 
                      -  							FAQs 
                    -  					Products & Services  ▼                        -  							How to get GEOINT Products 
                    -  					Careers  ▼                        -  							Current Openings 
                      -  							Occupations 
                      -  							Application Process 
                      -  							Benefits 
                      -  							Student Opportunities 
                      -  							Diversity 
                      -  							Recruiting Events 
                      -  							FAQs 
                    -  					Media Room  ▼                        -  							Press Releases 
                      -  							Speeches & Remarks 
                      -  							Pathfinder 
                      -  							Press Kit 
                    -  					Partners  ▼                        -  							Business Opportunities 
                      -  							Cooperative Agreements 
                      -  							International Activities 
                      -  							Research and Grants 
                      -  							Small Business Interaction 
                      -  							Mentor Protégé 

Media Room
| Press Releases         |
|------------------------|
| Speeches & Remarks |
| Pathfinder             |
| Press Kit              |

   NGA provides timely, relevant, and accurate geospatial    intelligence in support of national security.

   Putting the power of GEOINT in your hands.

NGA Operating StatusNSG Standards RegistryGEOINT OnlineStudent OpportunitiesNGA Business OpportunitiesMedia RequestsContact Us

Home > Media Room > Pathfinder

# 			The Pathfinder 						

| Key DocumentsCurrent PathfinderPathfinder ArchivesNov/Dec 2012Sept/Oct 2012July/Aug 2012May/June 2012Mar/Apr 2012Jan/Feb 2012Contact Us					NGA Public Affairs					publicaffairs@nga.mil					571-557-5400				 Accessibility NO FEAR Act FOIA Privacy & Security Web Policy Site Map www.usa.gov |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
# C_2014315EN.01001101.xml

| 15.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 315/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 315/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 10 July 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin — Germany) — Naime Dogan v Bundesrepublik Deutschland

(Case C-138/13) (1)

1

((Request for a preliminary ruling - EEC-Turkey Association Agreement - Additional Protocol - Article 41(1) - Right of residence of family members of Turkish nationals - National legislation requiring evidence of basic linguistic knowledge with regard to the family member wishing to enter the national territory - Lawfulness - Directive 2003/86/EC - Family reunification - Article 7(2) - Compatibility))

2014/C 315/15

Language of the case: Germany

Referring court

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Berlin

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Naime Dogan

Applicant:

Defendant: Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 41(1) of the Additional Protocol, signed in Brussels on 23 November 1970 and concluded, approved and confirmed on behalf of the Community by Council Regulation (EEC) No 2760/72 of 19 December 1972 concluding the additional protocol and the financial protocol signed on 23 November 1970 and annexed to the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey and relating to the measures to be taken for their implementation must be interpreted as meaning that the ‘standstill’ clause set out in that provision precludes a measure of national law, introduced after the entry into force of that additional protocol in the Member State concerned, which imposes on spouses of Turkish nationals residing in that Member State, who wish to enter the territory of that State for the purposes of family reunification, the condition that they demonstrate beforehand that they have acquired basic knowledge of the official language of that Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.

1

---
No. 9221.

#### The City of Wooster *v.*The Central Union Telephone Co.

(Decided June 5, 1906.)

Error to Circuit Court of Wayne county.

*Mf. Benton G. Hay,*city solicitor, and *Mr. A. D. Mets,*for plaintiff in error.

*509
      *Mr. TL. Richardson*and *Mr. John McSweeney,*for defendant in error.

Judgment reversed on authority of *Queen City Telephone Co.*v. *Cincinnati,*73 Ohio St., 64.

' Shatjck, 0- J., Price, Crew, Summers, Spear and Davis, JJ., concur.
#### Robert DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-1462.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 27, 1978.

Jack 0. Johnson, Public Defender, Paul C. Helm, Asst. Public Defender, Deborah L. Oates, Legal Intern, Bartow, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and William I. Munsey, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment of the trial court but we agree with appellant that the phrase “at hard labor” in his sentence is improper. *Brooks v. State,*349 So.2d 794 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Therefore we remand the case for correction of sentence, and appellant need not be present at that time.

GRIMES, Acting C. J., and SCHEB and OTT, JJ., concur.
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

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of Ronson
Corporation (the "Company"), certifies that:

      (1)   the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
            period ended September 30, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with
            the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
            Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78 m or 78 o(d)); and

      (2)   the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.


Date: November 14, 2006               /s/ Louis V. Aronson II
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Louis V. Aronson II
                                      President and Chief Executive Officer


Date: November 14, 2006               /s/ Daryl K. Holcomb
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Daryl K. Holcomb
                                      Vice President 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.


                                       25
# Local students meet with chief of staff, learn how the warfighter receives supplies at DLA Distribution

/ Published Dec. 22, 2016
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pennsylvania, On Dec. 13, 26 students from Central York High School’s advanced placement U.S. Government and Politics class visited Defense Logistics Agency Distribution headquarters for an overview on how the Department of Defense supplies its men and women in uniform. 
DLA Distribution chief of staff Perry Knight welcomed the students, briefly chatting with them about why he is passionate about his job supporting Distribution’s mission, and advising the students to actively seek out their own passion.

“Even now, as sophomores, juniors and seniors, you need to ask yourself ‘What are the goals that I want to achieve?  Where do I want to be?’” said Knight.

After recounting his time growing up on farm in rural Virginia, Knight explained that although the odds were against him escaping small-town life, he followed his dreams and attended Virginia Military Institute on a track scholarship, where his coach validated his drive for success.  “Everybody that you come into contact with is part of who you are and who you will be.  The most important thing is to never let anybody steal your joy.”

Following their discussion with Knight, the students received a command brief, which highlighted DLA Distribution’s network of 25 distribution centers around the world and detailed how those sites support industrial customers, other government agencies, and the warfighter in the field. 

The students ended their day with a tour of the Department of Defense’s largest warehouse, the Eastern Distribution Center.  The tour focused on how the distribution center receives supplies that are then stored or consolidated with other supplies and sent on to the warfighter upon request.