alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1100 New York Avenue Northwest

Washington, DC 20527

Office +1 202.336.8400

dfc.gov

Summary of the December 8, 2021, DFC Board of Directors Meeting

The DFC Board of Directors met at 2:30PM, on Wednesday, December 8, 2021. In attendance were: 

Deputy Secretary of State Brian McKeon, USAID Deputy Administrator Isobel Coleman, DFC Acting 

Chief Executive Officer Dev Jagadesan, Acting Assistant Secretary of the Department of the Treasury 

Larry MacDonald, Acting Undersecretary of Commerce for International Trade Diane Farrell, Mr. Irv 

Bailey, Mr. Chris Vincze, and Mr. Deven Parekh. The meeting was closed to the public. 

During the December 8, 2021, meeting, the Board received a report from Chief Operating Officer David 

Marchick outlining Management’s activities over the past quarter. The Board also discussed the 

Corporation’s strategy for deploying its private equity product. The Board approved one transaction (an 

equity transaction in Egypt), discussed its assessment of the potential for DFC to declare a dividend 

based on FY2021 results, and following the review, discussion, and action on the administrative matters 

on its agenda, the Board adjourned.
Sl()-1()0405-()() 1 

## C I lARLESTO N COUNT Y AVIATIO N AUTHORIT Y

Marc h 25 . 201 0

Th e Honorabl e RaN-nion

d 11 . La ) loo d Secretar y U.S . Deparlmen l oirransjionatio n 120 0 New Jerse y Ave . Si i Washington . D C 2059 0 RE : Docket

DOT-OST-2010 ^ Dea r Mr . Secrctaiy : Than k you fo r th e opporiunit

y t o expres s m

y suppor t fo r th e applicatio n to r

antitrus t immunit y an d propose d join t

busines s agreement

lllc d b > .America

n .-Xirlines an

d Japa n Airlines . Th e propose d allianc e between thes e tw o airline s i s vita l fo r oneworl d to compet e elTectiveiy wit

h th e Sta r an d Sk y Tea malliance . Thi s increase d inlerallianc e competitio n will i

n tur n enhanc e the bcncllt s o f the Department' s Open Skie s polic y - Hrs t b y solidifyin g U.S.-Japa

n Ope n Skies , (he

n b y servin g a s afoundatio n fo r furthe r liberalizatio n acros s .Asia . Afte r athoroug h review . I encourag e the Departmen t o f I'ransportatio n t o approv e thi s applicaiio n a s i

t woul d enabl e thes e oneworl d allianc e airline s t o wor k closel y together

t o deliver highly competitiv e ai r

transportatio n services , .'\pproval fo r AA/JAL allianc e will hav e apositiv e impac t

o n ai r trave l b y oflerin g custt)mer s more service , schedulin g an d pricin g option s an

d wil l hel p t

o ensure tha

t customer s continu e t

o bcnell t fro mhavin g thre e competitiv e ai r

alliance s to choos e from . 1 urg e you to quickl y approv e thi s application . Sincerclv . 

## •DXcj^d ^ ^

- d<Uuw ^ l)a\i d (j . Jenning s Chairma n
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4117 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4117

       To amend section 13031 of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget 
   Reconciliation Act of 1985 (relating to fees for certain customs 
 services) to create an exemption from fees for certain small aircraft 
                      travelling short distances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 23, 1994

 Mr. Gillmor introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
       To amend section 13031 of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget 
   Reconciliation Act of 1985 (relating to fees for certain customs 
 services) to create an exemption from fees for certain small aircraft 
                      travelling short distances.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 13031 of 
the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 
58c) (relating to fees for certain customs services) is amended in 
subsection (b)(1)--
            (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as 
        subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively; and
            (2) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
            ``(B) the arrival of any passenger aboard any aircraft 
        equipped to carry no more than 11 passengers, if--
                    ``(i) the aircraft is being used to provide 
                transportation only between places that are no more 
                than 50 miles apart;
                    ``(ii) the aircraft is in competition with a ferry; 
                and
                    ``(iii) the fee for such transportation is less 
                than $35;''.

                                 <all>
```
**~laft be**  **/1/ r/.**  **%a b.J**  **/Ir/ //**  **o/b ./n~**  **nt/. IN~t//rtt**  **.** lr,l;,w/u:;lrtt//rtt A I R CRAFT Billin gs Fl y in g S erv ice Inc .. Mod el U H- 60A RESTRICTED C AT E GORY S P E CIAL P U RPOSE OPERA TIO 'S : Agr i cultural 14 CFR 2 1. 2 5( b )( I) Fore st and W i ldlife Con se rvation 14 C FR 2 1. 25(b ) (2) External Loads 14 CFR 2 1. 2 5(b )( 7) . //ft.; V **rt·t'l~~·m0 .**  t tt11/ / hr **~""' Vn·//~rm0**  !./t t t'l t .JhN/ N·hrh tj /1m·/ kl'l' r/ .; ht!l' t 'l't t wt/t t/t August 23.2016 . fly t.ll/•rrt'lrtt r/lh"r . **lt~/lt/tt- irtt**  **/N·** &- 1L MAN E R. AIR F RAME BRA N C H /. &ft.) LOS ANGELES AIR C RAFT C E R T I FICATfO OFF I C E This ce rt(fi c at e may b e t ran!>jerr e d if e ndors e d as fJI'Ovid e d on th e re vers e hereof A n y a ll e ra t io n of /hi s ce rt ijic (lf e and 1 o r !h e 1 )pe Ce rl iji ca te /.l aw S h ee t.

**i.~** puni s h ab le b y a fi n e of n o / exceedi n g S I.(} (} (}, o r im p ri so nm e nl n ot excee din g 3 y ea r s. o r hm h. .

FAA **FOR~** I 8 11 0

- 9 (2

- 82) Pa ge I of 2
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

PETER MANUEL CANDELARIA,

 

 Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

State.

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-20-00010-CR

Appeal from the

118th District Court

of Howard County, Texas 

 (TC# 15559)

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third motion for extension of time within which to 

file the brief until May 12, 2020. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

FILE THE APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Rick Dunbar, Appellant’s attorney, prepare the 

Appellant’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before May 12, 2020.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 14th day of April, 2020.

PER CURIAM

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
```

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 121 (Monday, June 24, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 37722]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: C1-2013-12445]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No.: FAA-2013-0142; Notice No. 25-139]
RIN 2120-AK12

Harmonization of Airworthiness Standards--Gust and Maneuver Load 
Requirements

Correction

    In proposed rule document 2013-12445 appearing on pages 31851-31860 
in the issue of Tuesday, May 28, 2013, make the following corrections:

Sec.  25.341  [Corrected]

    1. On page 31858, in Sec.  25.341, in the second column, in the 
twelfth line from the bottom, ``U[sigma][rho][egr][phiv]'' should read 
``U[sigma]ref''.
    2. On the same page, in the same section, in the same column, in 
the same line, ``U[sigma]'' should read ``U[sigma]''.
    3. On the same page, in the same section, in the same column, in 
the tenth and third lines from the bottom, ``U[sigma]'' should read 
``U[sigma]''.

[FR Doc. C1-2013-12445 Filed 6-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
```
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4045 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4045

   To confer United States citizenship posthumously on Rudolph Salli.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 16, 1994

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To confer United States citizenship posthumously on Rudolph Salli.

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

SECTION 1. CITIZENSHIP FOR RUDOLPH SALLI.

    Rudolph Salli, a native of Finland who was employed in the service 
of the United States during World War II, shall be held and considered 
to have been a citizen of the United States at the time of his death.

                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Bruce Reid, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Nicholas Figueroa, J.), rendered March 14, 1989, convicting defendant after jury trial of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him to *2 Vs*to 7 years imprisonment, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim of a biased, confused and poorly organized jury charge is unpreserved for appellate review by appropriate objection *(see, e.g., People v Ingram,*67 NY2d 897). Although exception was taken to certain portions of the charge, supplementary charges were requested and given, and no further exception was taken. In any event, although the trial court made minor misstatements during the charge, it is clear that the charge viewed as a whole was neither inadequate, nor imbalanced, and it adequately conveyed the appropriate standards *(see, e.g., People v Adams,*69 NY2d 805).

There is no merit to defendant’s claim that the prosecution altered the theory of prosecution. The indictment charged, *inter alia,*robbery in the first degree committed by defendant and his co-defendant "acting in concert with each other and others.” The People proceeded on that theory, presenting testimony of an accomplice who testified to specific acts by defendant in furtherance of the crime. Viewing the evidence *419in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), the People fulfilled their obligation to prove the material elements of the crime as alleged in the indictment *(see, e.g., People v Charles,*61 NY2d 321).

Defendant’s claim that the trial court somehow coerced a verdict by giving a juror the impression that it believed defendant to be guilty is unpreserved for appellate review. As conceded by defendant, there is no factual record on this subject *(People v Charleston,*54 NY2d 622). Concur—Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.
NUMBER 13-14-00061-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant,

v.

DAVID ALVAREZ, Appellee.

On appeal from the 28th District Court 

of Nueces County, Texas.

ORDER

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Perkes

Order Per Curiam

Appellant, the State of Texas, by and through the District Attorney in and for 

Nueces County, Texas, has filed a motion for stay of proceedings in the above cause. 

On January 27, 2014, the Honorable Nanette Hasette, Judge of the 28th District Court of 

Nueces County, Texas, granted a motion to suppress evidence. The State has filed a 

notice of appeal and has requested a stay in the trial court’s proceedings pending 
2

disposition of its appeal. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. § 44.01(a)(5), (e) (West 2006 

& Supp. 2013). 

The Court, having examined and fully considered the motion for stay of 

proceedings, is of the opinion that said motion should be granted. The motion for stay 

is hereby GRANTED, and the trial court's proceedings are hereby ordered STAYED 

pending disposition of the State’s appeal. 

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

4th day of February, 2014.
# Amtsblatt C 38A/15.

| | ISSN 1725-2407 |
| --- | --- |
| Amtsblatt
  der Europäischen Union | C 38A |
| | |
| Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache | Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen | 48. Jahrgang15. Februar 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2407

Amtsblatt

der Europäischen Union

C 38A

Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache

Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen

48. Jahrgang15. Februar 2005

---

| Informationsnummer | Inhalt | Seite |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Berichtigungen |
| | |
| 2005/C 038A/2 | Berichtigung der Stellenausschreibung für eine stellvertretende Generaldirektorin/einen stellvertretenden Generaldirektor (Besoldungsgruppe A*15) in der Generaldirektion für Außenhandel — COM/2005/268 (ABL C 28 A vom 4.2.2005) | 3 |

Informationsnummer

Inhalt

Seite

Berichtigungen

2005/C 038A/2

Berichtigung der Stellenausschreibung für eine stellvertretende Generaldirektorin/einen stellvertretenden Generaldirektor (Besoldungsgruppe A*15) in der Generaldirektion für Außenhandel — COM/2005/268 (ABL C 28 A vom 4.2.2005)

ABL C 28 A vom 4.2.2005

3

| DE | |
| --- | --- |

DE

---

Berichtigungen

15.2.2005

| 15.2.2005 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | CA 38/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

CA 38/3

---

Berichtigung der Stellenausschreibung für eine stellvertretende Generaldirektorin/einen stellvertretenden Generaldirektor (Besoldungsgruppe A*15) in der Generaldirektion für Außenhandel COM/2005/268

(Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union
  C 28 A vom 4. Februar 2005

  )

(2005/C 38 A/01)

Seite 5: Voraussetzungen für eine Bewerbung:

anstatt:

| „4. | gründliche Kenntnis einer Amtssprache der Europäischen Union oder einer Amtssprache der zehn neuen Mitgliedstaaten (Tschechische Republik, Estland, Zypern, Lettland, Litauen, Ungarn, Malta, Polen, Slowenien und Slowakische Republik) und ausreichende Kenntnis einer weiteren Amtssprache der Europäischen Union. Die Bewerberinnen und Bewerber werden darauf hingewiesen, dass die Ausleseverfahren nur in englischer, französischer und deutscher Sprache durchgeführt werden.“ |
| --- | --- |

„4.

gründliche Kenntnis einer Amtssprache der Europäischen Union oder einer Amtssprache der zehn neuen Mitgliedstaaten (Tschechische Republik, Estland, Zypern, Lettland, Litauen, Ungarn, Malta, Polen, Slowenien und Slowakische Republik) und ausreichende Kenntnis einer weiteren Amtssprache der Europäischen Union. Die Bewerberinnen und Bewerber werden darauf hingewiesen, dass die Ausleseverfahren nur in englischer, französischer und deutscher Sprache durchgeführt werden.“

muss es heißen:

| „4. | gründliche Kenntnis einer Amtssprache der Europäischen Union und ausreichende Kenntnis einer weiteren Amtssprache der Europäischen Union. Die Bewerberinnen und Bewerber werden darauf hingewiesen, dass die Ausleseverfahren nur in englischer, französischer und deutscher Sprache durchgeführt werden.“ |
| --- | --- |

„4.

gründliche Kenntnis einer Amtssprache der Europäischen Union und ausreichende Kenntnis einer weiteren Amtssprache der Europäischen Union. Die Bewerberinnen und Bewerber werden darauf hingewiesen, dass die Ausleseverfahren nur in englischer, französischer und deutscher Sprache durchgeführt werden.“

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-4488

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMES MICHAEL NICHOLS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern 

District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Thomas E. Johnston, 

District Judge. (2:07-cr-00192-1)

Submitted: December 18, 2014 Decided: January 7, 2015

Before DUNCAN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Christian M. Capece, KAY CASTO & CHANEY PLLC, Charleston, West 

Virginia, for Appellant. R. Booth Goodwin II, United States 

Attorney, Monica D. Coleman, Assistant United States Attorney, 

Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

James Michael Nichols appeals from the twelve-month 

sentence imposed upon revocation of his supervised release. He 

argues that his sentence is unreasonable. For the reasons that 

follow, we affirm. 

We will affirm a sentence imposed after revocation of 

supervised release if it is within the prescribed statutory 

range and not plainly unreasonable. United States v. Crudup, 

461 F.3d 433, 437 (4th Cir. 2006). At Nichols’ revocation 

hearing, the district court correctly determined that Nichols’ 

advisory sentencing range was 8-14 months. See U.S. Sentencing 

Guidelines Manual § 7B1.4(a), p.s. (2013). Nichols argues that 

the district court erroneously considered the seriousness of one 

of his supervised release violations in contravention of 18 

U.S.C. § 3583(e) (2012). See id. (noting that some 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3553(a) (2012) factors are not to be considered for supervised 

release sentence). Our review of the hearing reveals the oneyear term of imprisonment and two years of supervised release 

thereafter (with numerous special conditions regarding treating 

and preventing Nichols’ alcoholism) were based on the court’s 

concern that Nichols’ continued drinking was going to kill 

someone. This view was supported by Nichols’ eight prior 

driving under the influence convictions and his violence toward 

family members while intoxicated.
3

Under these circumstances, we find that the district 

court adequately explained the selected sentence which was 

within the recommended sentencing range and based on permitted 

considerations. United States v. Thompson, 595 F.3d 544, 547 

(4th Cir. 2010). Thus, we do not find that Nichols’ sentence 

was plainly unreasonable. Crudup, 461 F.3d at 437; see also

Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 346-55 (2007) (upholding 

presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentence for 

non-revocation sentence). We therefore affirm. We dispense 

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before the court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 171 (Tuesday, September 4, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 44883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19077]



[[Page 44883]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention


Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Management 
Analysis and Services Office, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The 
grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential 
trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant 
applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
    Name of Committee: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and 
Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)--PAR 13-129, NIOSH Member Conflict 
Special Emphasis Panel.
    Date: October 25, 2018.
    Time: 1:00 p.m.-5:00 p.m. EST.
    Place: Teleconference.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    For Further Information Contact: Nina Turner, Ph.D., Scientific 
Review Officer, Office of Extramural Programs, 1095 Willowdale Road, 
Morgantown, WV 26506, (304) 285-5976; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7917010d4b391a1d1a571e160f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="aec0d6da9ceecdcacd80c9c1d8">[email protected]</span></a>.
    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been 
delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to 
announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, 
for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency 
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Sherri Berger,
Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2018-19077 Filed 8-31-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4163-18-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Cause No. WR-83,625- 01

IN RE: DAVID MARK DA VIS II

O n Petition for Writ of Mandamus To The Angelina County Court at Law Number 2 § § § § § COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

FOR THE

STATE OF TEXAS

Notice

COMES NOW the Pro Se Relator , David Mark Davis II, and would respectfully show the
Honorable Court of Criminal Appeals the following missing information for docketing purposes:

Tri al Court

1. The Honorable Judge of the trial court who is respondent to this action wa s: The Hon.
Derek Flournoy . Judge Flournoy is the elected Judge for the Angelina County Court at

Law Number 2 and he presided over all matters relevant to this action

.

2. The Court reporter in the trial court for all times relevant to this action was Elizabeth

Murphy

. The relator provides this information in hopes of ensuring the most accurate information is on

file in the case file.

Respectfully Submitt ed

,

David Mark Davis II Relator, Pro Se 905 N. Loop 499, No 525 Harlingen, Texas 78550 (936) 238-8507 WR-83,625-01 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 7/27/2015 10:38:15 PM Accepted 7/28/2015 8:09:00 AM

ABEL ACOSTA CLERKCertificate of Service

I certify that on July 27 , 2015 , I sent a copy of the foregoing document to all parties listed

below as indicated.

____________________ David Mark Davis II

VIA Fax:

Honorable Derek Flournoy
Respondent and Presiding Judge

o f the County Court at Law #2

po f Angelina County, Texas.

VIA email:

STATE OF TEXAS (through Counsel):

Ed. Jones at ejones@angelinacounty.net

James Yakovsky at jyakovsky@angelinacounty.net
EXHIBIT 32.2

 

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 this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of SurModics, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended September 30, 2015, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Andrew D.C. LaFrence, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| Dated:  May 10, 2016 | Signature: | /s/ Andrew D.C. LaFrence      |
|--------------------------------|------------|-------------------------------|
|                           |       | Andrew D.C. LaFrence          |
|                           |       | Vice President of Finance and |
|                           |       | Chief Financial Officer       |