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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3051 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3051

To provide that certain property located in the State of Oklahoma owned 
by an Indian housing authority for the purpose of providing low-income 
housing shall be treated as Federal property under the Act of September 
               30, 1950 (Public Law 874, 81st Congress).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 13, 1993

 Mr. Brewster introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide that certain property located in the State of Oklahoma owned 
by an Indian housing authority for the purpose of providing low-income 
housing shall be treated as Federal property under the Act of September 
               30, 1950 (Public Law 874, 81st Congress).

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN PROPERTY IN THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA OWNED BY INDIAN 
              HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR PURPOSE OF PROVIDING LOW-INCOME 
              HOUSING TREATED AS FEDERAL PROPERTY UNDER PUBLIC LAW 874, 
              81ST CONGRESS.

    (a) In General.--Any real property located in the State of Oklahoma 
that--
            (1) is owned by an Indian housing authority and used for 
        low-income housing (including housing assisted under the mutual 
        help homeownership opportunity program under section 202 of the 
        United States Housing Act of 1937), and
            (2) at any time prior to the date of the enactment of this 
        Act--
                    (A) was designated by treaty as tribal land, or
                    (B) satisfied the definition of Federal property 
                under section 403(1)(A) of the Act of September 30, 
                1950 (Public Law 874, 81st Congress),
shall be treated as Federal property under such section.
    (b) Applicability.--Subsection (a) shall apply only with respect to 
payments made under the Act of September 30, 1950 (Public Law 874, 81st 
Congress) for fiscal year 1994.

                                 <all>
```
# C_2013173EN.01000701.xml

| 19.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 173/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 173/7

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6939 — CVC/Ista)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2013/C 173/02

On 13 June 2013, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6939. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32013M6939. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
V

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3048

For the relief of Vivian Eney.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 9, 1993

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

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

For the relief of Vivian Eney.

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

3 SECTION 1. PAYMENT OF CLAIM.

4 Notwithstanding section 3 of House Resolution 449,

5 adopted June 2, 1971, as enacted by chapter IV of the

6 Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1972 (40 U.S.C.

7 206b(e)), the Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, out of

8 money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the

9 sum of $17,230.53 to Vivian Eney, widow of Christopher

10 Eney. This sum represents the value of the compensatory

11 time off Christopher Eney accrued for duty as a member

12 of the Capitol Police before his death. Payment of this
2

•HR 3048 IH

1 sum shall fully satisfy any claim Vivian Eney has against

2 the United States for the value of the compensatory time

3 off accrued by Christopher Eney for duty as a member

4 of the Capitol Police.

5 SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON FEES.

6 No amount exceeding 10 percent of the payment

7 made under section 1 shall be paid to or received by any

8 agent or attorney in consideration for services rendered

9 in connection with the payment. Any person who violates

10 this section shall be guilty of an infraction and shall be

11 subject to a fine in the amount provided under section

12 3571 of title 18, United States Code.

Æ
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

I, L. Michael Cutrer, certify that:

 

 1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Qof North American Scientific, Inc.;

 

 2.    Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

 3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements,and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

 4.    The registrant’s other certifying officer and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:

 

a)     Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;

 

b)    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c)     Disclosed in this report any changes in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

 5.    The registrant’s other certifying officer and Ihave disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control overfinancial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee ofregistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

a)     All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls over financialreporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b)    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.

 
|  Date: September 20, 2004    |
|----------------------------------------|
|                                   |
| /s/  L. Michael Cutrer                 |   |
| L.  Michael Cutrer                     |
| President  and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
#### Donald Earl CHURCH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. N-12.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 24, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2012121EN.01001801.xml

| 26.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/18

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6513 — Avenance Italy/Gemeaz Cusin)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2012/C 121/03

On 23 March 2012, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6513. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32012M6513. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 154 (Thursday, August 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39462-39463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17090]


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

JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES


Meeting of the Judicial Conference Advisory; Committee on Rules 
of Appellate Procedure

AGENCY: Judicial Conference of the United States, Advisory Committee on 
Rules of Appellate Procedure.

ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on Rules of Appellate Procedure will 
hold a meeting on October 26, 2018. The meeting will be open to public 
observation but not participation. An agenda and supporting materials 
will be posted at least 7 days in advance of the

[[Page 39463]]

meeting at: http://www.uscourts.gov/rules-policies/records-and-archives-rules-committees/agenda-books.

DATES: October 26, 2018.

TIME: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, Mecham 
Conference Center, Administrative Office of the United States Courts, 
One Columbus Circle NE, Washington, DC 20544.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca A. Womeldorf, Rules Committee 
Secretary, Rules Committee Staff, Administrative Office of the United 
States Courts, Washington, DC 20544, telephone (202) 502-1820.

    Dated: August 6, 2018.
Rebecca A. Womeldorf,
Rules Committee Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-17090 Filed 8-8-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 2210-55-P
July 1, 2015

Mr. Jared Oleson

5865 93rd Ave

Pinellas Park, FL 33782

Dear Mr. Covert:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your June 26, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

2494), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
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 Quarterly Report of Auscrete Corporation (the “Company’) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the “report”), I, John Sprovieri, Chief Executive Officer 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated this 19th day of May, 2014.








/s/John Sprovieri/s/John SprovieriChief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3051

To provide that certain property located in the State of Oklahoma owned

by an Indian housing authority for the purpose of providing low-income

housing shall be treated as Federal property under the Act of September

30, 1950 (Public Law 874, 81st Congress).

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 13, 1993

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

Committee on Education and Labor

A BILL

To provide that certain property located in the State of

Oklahoma owned by an Indian housing authority for

the purpose of providing low-income housing shall be

treated as Federal property under the Act of September

30, 1950 (Public Law 874, 81st Congress).

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3051 IH

1 SECTION 1. CERTAIN PROPERTY IN THE STATE OF OKLA2 HOMA OWNED BY INDIAN HOUSING AUTHOR3 ITY FOR PURPOSE OF PROVIDING LOW-IN4 COME HOUSING TREATED AS FEDERAL PROP5 ERTY UNDER PUBLIC LAW 874, 81ST CON6 GRESS.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Any real property located in the

8 State of Oklahoma that—

9 (1) is owned by an Indian housing authority

10 and used for low-income housing (including housing

11 assisted under the mutual help homeownership op12 portunity program under section 202 of the United

13 States Housing Act of 1937), and

14 (2) at any time prior to the date of the enact15 ment of this Act—

16 (A) was designated by treaty as tribal

17 land, or

18 (B) satisfied the definition of Federal

19 property under section 403(1)(A) of the Act of

20 September 30, 1950 (Public Law 874, 81st

21 Congress),

22 shall be treated as Federal property under such section.

23 (b) APPLICABILITY.—Subsection (a) shall apply only

24 with respect to payments made under the Act of Septem25 ber 30, 1950 (Public Law 874, 81st Congress) for fiscal

26 year 1994.
3

•HR 3051 IH

Æ
SERVED JANUARY 17,2012 

:'-:'^RTMENTCF 

^;-'AN3PORWiOM 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION JSCAET OPERATIONS 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC M M 23 P hUS 

IN THE MATTER OF 

MARTINAIRE AVIATION, LLC 

FAA DOCKET NO [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMSNO. FAA-2011-1295 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2011 -GL-70-0205) has been 

assigned to Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other 

communications regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing 

Docket, and the other persons on the attached Service List. 

Ronnie A. Yoder--^ y 

Chief Adniinistrative-Law-Judge 

Attachment - Service List 

JAN 18 2012 

HEARING DOCKET 
FDMSNo. FAA-201M295 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Michael L. Dworkin, Respofideni's Cowisel 

Michael L. Dworkin and Associates 

405 California Street, Suite 210 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

TEL; 415-421-2500 

FAX: 415-421-2560 

Kate Barber, Complainanf 's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Great Lakes Region, AGL-7B 

Federal Aviation Administration 

2300 East Devon Avenue 

DesPIaines, [L600\8 

TEL: 847-294-7862 

FAX: 847-294-7498 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Acfminisfraiive Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Scr\'icc Wiisby U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use llie following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration. 600 Independence Avenue, S.W.. Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000. Washington, 

DC 20591". AttenUon: Hearing Docket Clerk AGC-430.
250 La. 100

#### Lucy H. DAVID and Husband v. HOUSTON FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY et al.

No. 48541.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 3, 1967.

In re: Great American Insurance Company applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Lafayette. 192 So.2d 583.

Writ refused. The judgment is not final. All rights are reserved on this point in the event of an adverse judgment on the merits.
#### Joan Hyers LICK, Appellant, v. John Earl LICK, Appellee.

No. 73-184.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 15, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION IX 75 Hawthorne Street San Francisco, CA 94105·3901

OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR 

# fa It 

# am

The Honorable William Rhodes Gila River Indian Community P.O. Box 97 Sacaton, AZ 85247 Re: Eligibility Determinationunder 40 C.F.R. Part 49 for a Clean Air Act (CAA) Air Quality Management Plan Dear Governor Rhodes: I ampleased to inform you that, in response to the November 17,2006 applicationbythe Gila River Indian Conununity (the Tribe), EPAhas determined that the Tribe is eligible for treatment inthe same manner as a state (TAS) for the following four CAAprograms, which make up the Tribe's Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP): (i) a tribal implementation plan (TIP) under CAA § 110; (ii) the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) under CAA § 111; (iii) the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) under CAA § 112; and (iv) a title V permitprogram. Inaddition, we conclude that the Tribe is eligible for TAS for notification as an "affected state" under CAA § 505(a)(2) and air quality designations under CAA § 107(d). To obtainTAS eligibility, a tribal applicant must demonstrate that it meets the criteria set forth in Section 301(d)(2) ofthe CAA, 42 U.S.c. § 7601(d)(2), and codified in the Tribal Authority Rule at 40 C.F.R. § 49.6. After reviewingthe Tribe's application and other relevant materials, EPAhas determined that the Tribe meets these criteria. EPA evaluates a Tribe's eligibility for TAS under the CAA on a case-by-casebasis. Thus, this eligibility determination applies only to CAA Sections 107(d), 110, 111, 112, 114, and title V (which includes Section 505). Ourconclusion relates solely to the Tribe's eligibility for TAS and does not address the approvability under the CAA ofany regulatoryprogram in the Tribe'sAQMP. EPA will determine whetherto approve the various components oftheTribe's AQMP for aparticular CAA program in separate notice and commentprocesses, where appropriate. As a general matter, future requests for eligibility under this oranother statutory authority may require additional eligibility analyses. Ifyou have any questions about this eligibility detennination, please contact Vali Frank ofthe Office ofRegional Counsel at (415) 972-3916 or MaeveFoley ofthe Air Division at (415) 947-4105. For questions regarding EPA's process for acting onthe Tribe's AQMP, please contact Jeanhee Hong ofthe Office ofRegional Counsel at (415) 947-3570 orWienke Tax ofthe Air Division at 415-947-4192.

Printed on Recycled PaperI appreciate the Tribe's dedication to protectingthe environment onthe Reservation, demonstrated bythe application for this extensive eligibility determination. EPARegion 9 looks forward to working with the Tribe to continue developing and strengthening effective tribal environmental programs. Sincerely,

Laura Yoshii Acting Regional Administrator

cc: Margaret Cook, GRIC DEQ Dan Blair, GRIC DEQ
No. 11664.

#### Sprague, Receiver, *v.*The Memorial Association of Franklin County et al.

Decided December *7,*1909.

Error to Circuit Court of Franklin county.

*Mr. Louis J. Dolle; Mr. Dwight Harrison*and *Mr. Walter C.*Taylor, for. plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Webber, McCoy, King & Game; Mr. Harry L. Gordon; Messrs. Vorys, Safer, Seymour & Pease; Mr. Joseph H. Dyer; Mr. William Hartley Pugh; Mr. Elliott Pugh; Messrs. Outhwaite, Linn & Thurman,; Mr. Morrison R. Waite*and *Mr. G. J. Marriott,*for defendants in error.

Judgment reversed and judgment for plaintiff in error.

Crew, C. J., Summers, Spear and Price, JJ., concur.