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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), 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. 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:*                         National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Special Emphasis Panel; ZHD1 DSR-Z 54.                    

*Date:*                         April 5, 2012.                    

*Time:*                         2 p.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Peter Zelazowski, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Division of Scientific Review, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-7510, (301) 435-6902,                         *peter.zelazowski@nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS) 

Dated: March 2, 2012.

Jennifer S. Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2012-5691 Filed 3-7-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2028 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2028

         To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Thymol.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

 Mr. Menendez introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Thymol.

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

SECTION 1. THYMOL.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.01.43 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Thymol) is amended by 
striking the date in the effective period column and inserting ``12/31/
2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
# L_2006008EN.01003801.xml

| 13.1.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 8/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 8/38

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 46/2006

of 12 January 2006

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the import of sorghum issued in Regulation (EC) No 2094/2005

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003, on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 12(1) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction from third countries in the duty on sorghum imported into Spain was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2094/2005 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction from third countries in the duty on sorghum imported into Spain was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2094/2005 (2).

| (2) | Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 (3), allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 and on the basis of the tenders notified to make no award. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 (3), allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 and on the basis of the tenders notified to make no award.

| (3) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 a maximum reduction in the duty should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 a maximum reduction in the duty should not be fixed.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 6 to 12 January 2006 in response to the invitation to tender for the reduction in the duty on imported sorghum issued in Regulation (EC) No 2094/2005.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 January 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 12 January 2006.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005 p. 11).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 335, 21.12.2005, p. 4.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 177, 28.7.1995, p. 4. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1558/2005 (OJ L 249, 24.9.2005, p. 6).

3

---
# L_2006054EN.01002101.xml

| 24.2.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 54/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 54/21

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 334/2006

of 23 February 2006

concerning tenders notified in response to the invitation to tender for the import of maize issued in Regulation (EC) No 1809/2005

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 12(1) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported in Portugal from third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1809/2005 (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

An invitation to tender for the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported in Portugal from third countries was opened pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1809/2005 (2).

| (2) | Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 (3), allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 and on the basis of the tenders notified, to make no award. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 (3), allows the Commission to decide, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 and on the basis of the tenders notified, to make no award.

| (3) | On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 a maximum reduction in the duty should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of the criteria laid down in Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1839/95 a maximum reduction in the duty should not be fixed.

| (4) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders notified from 17 to 23 February 2006 in response to the invitation to tender for the reduction in the duty on imported maize issued in Regulation (EC) No 1809/2005.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 24 February 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 23 February 2006.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78. Regulation as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1154/2005 (OJ L 187, 19.7.2005, p. 11).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 291, 5.11.2005, p. 4.

2

(3)  
  OJ L 177, 28.7.1995, p. 4. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1558/2005 (OJ L 249, 24.9.2005, p. 6).

3

---
# Good mcJming,

• 

# my name Is Ericua TI1omas. I 

# am from· St. Gabriel, LA, I 

# am 

# 26 years old, I 

# was bot·n with congenit

- al

# glaucoma, and I 

# with the Louisian, a**Democra cy**  

# Project. I 

# am here today to

supportthe proposed. oilI 

# refinery fule

' 

# changes, · andto

I 

# remindthe EPA

. 

# that,**bey~nd** 

# the fencelines, there
are many small communities like St. Gabriel along

# the Mississippi River that are at the mercy ofthe chemical plants. We need' :

to be informed, we need to be empowei--ed, and

! j 'i 

# we need to be protected. Thank you for giving me this opportun.ity to speak.

ma would like from the Baton Rouge,LA area, and IT am from Baton Rouge LA. I stand before you today to talk aboutthe importance ofthe proy.10sed refinery rules. I am so happy that you are putting these 4 rules ir:· place and I would like to encourage you on the first rule Fenceline monitoring. My mother was born in Saint Gabriel Louisiana a once beautiful farming community now lined with chemical plants all the way to Gismar. Before I was born many ofthe women ofthat small area had an outstanding number ofmiscarriages. Eventually a study was done butthey said it was unrelated. once I was born in 1988 with congenital glaucoma.Now I live in Baton Rouge the home ofExxon Refinery. One ofmy concerns about exxon mobil oil is its uses ofbenzene benzene is a harmful chemical use in gasoline and can cause serious healthproclems this breathing in air containing benzene. Benzene can also be absorbedthrough the skin d1Jring contact with a source such as gasoline, but because liquid benzene evaporates quickly, this is less common, althoughthese have decreased greatly over the last several decades due to federal and state regulations enclosing I think we should follow the state and federal regulations and not take the regulations for granted although we have gotten better with decreasing the use ofbenzene we still need to focus on howto use less ofit
Order filed October 17, 2013 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00606-CV

____________

HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, Appellant

V.

CARLO PARADA, PATRICIA CONTRERAS AND PATRICIA QUIROZ 

CONTRERAS, Appellees

On Appeal from the 151st District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2011-03419

O R D E R

Appellant’s brief was due October 7, 2013. No brief or motion for extension 

of time has been filed. Unless appellant submits its brief, and a motion reasonably 

explaining why the brief was late, to the clerk of this court on or before November 

18, 2013, the court will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 42.3(b). 

PER CURIAM
Exhibit 23



Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements:



|       |  |                                                                                                                                                                                
|------ |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(i)    |  | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-87658) pertaining to the ValuJet Airlines, Inc. 1993 Incentive Stock Option Plan and the ValuJet Airlines, Inc. 1994 Stock Option
Plan,
|       | 
|(ii)   |  | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-91624) pertaining to the ValuJet Airlines, Inc. 1995 Employee Stock Purchase Plan,                                                     
|       | 
|(iii)  |  | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 33-98568) pertaining to the Airways Corporation 1995 Stock Option Plan and 1995 Director Stock Option Plan,                               
|       | 
|(iv)   |  | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-62863) of AirTran Holdings, Inc.,                                                                                                     
|       | 
|(v)    |  | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-83048) of ValuJet Airlines, Inc.,                                                                                                      
|       | 
|(vi)   |  | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-82727) pertaining to the AirTran 1996 Stock Option Plan,                                                                              
|       | 
|(vii)  |  | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-41480) of AirTran Holdings, Inc.,                                                                                                     
|       | 
|(viii) |  | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-103209) pertaining to the AirTran Holdings, Inc. 2002 Long-Term Incentive Plan,                                                       
|       | 
|(ix)   |  | Registration Statement (Form S-4 No. 333-67300) of AirTran Airways, Inc., and                                                                                                  
|       | 
|(x)    |  | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-107415) of AirTran Holdings, Inc.;                                                                                                    



of our reports dated March 11, 2005,
with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of AirTran Holdings, Inc., AirTran Holdings, Inc. managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting of AirTran Holdings, Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004.



Atlanta, Georgia

March 11, 2005



/s/    Ernst & Young LLP
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.30

BASE SALARIES FOR EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

     On December 20, 2006, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors
of Quiksilver, Inc. (the "Company") approved new annual base salaries (effective
as of November 1, 2006) for the Company's named executive officers. The
following table sets forth the annual base salary levels of the Company's named
executive officers for fiscal 2007:

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Name and Position                                            Base Salary
-----------------                                            -----------
<S>                                                          <C>
Robert B. McKnight, Jr.,
   Chief Executive Officer                                     $950,000

Bernard Mariette,
   President                                                   $800,000

Charles S. Exon,
   Executive Vice President, Secretary and General Counsel     $425,000

Steven L. Brink,
   Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer                       $350,000
</TABLE>
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
TIMOTHY RYAN HAMMOCK, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-5019 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. )

) Opinion filed May 22, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; William D. Sites and Reinaldo Ojeda, Judges. Timothy Ryan Hammock, pro se. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Johnny T. Salgado, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. NORTHCUTT, BLACK, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
# L_2006125EN.01002201.xml

| 12.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 125/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/22

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 719/2006

of 11 May 2006

fixing the maximum export refund for skimmed-milk powder in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 582/2004

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 31(3) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds for skimmed-milk powder (2) provides for a permanent tender. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 582/2004 of 26 March 2004 opening a standing invitation to tender for export refunds for skimmed-milk powder (2) provides for a permanent tender.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 9 May 2006. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 580/2004 of 26 March 2004 establishing a tender procedure concerning export refunds for certain milk products (3) and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for the tendering period ending on 9 May 2006.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the permanent tender opened by Regulation (EC) No 582/2004, for the tendering period ending on 9 May 2006, the maximum amount of refund for the product and destinations referred to in Article 1(1) of that Regulation shall be 7,00 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 12 May 2006.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 11 May 2006.

For the Commission

J. L. DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1913/2005 (OJ L 307, 25.11.2005, p. 2).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 67. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 409/2006 (OJ L 71, 10.3.2006, p. 5).

2

(3)  
  OJ L 90, 27.3.2004, p. 58. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1814/2005 (OJ L 292, 8.11.2005, p. 3).

3

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1594

ASHISH SHRESTHA,

 Petitioner,

v.

LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,

 Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration 

Appeals.

Submitted: February 18, 2016 Decided: March 15, 2016

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

Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kevin H. Knutson, Sacramento, California, for Petitioner. 

Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant, Derek C. Julius, 

Senior Litigation Counsel, Andrew B. Insenga, Nelle M. Seymour, 

Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Ashish Shrestha, a native and citizen of Nepal, petitions 

for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals 

(Board) dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s 

denial of his requests for asylum and withholding of removal.* 

We have reviewed the administrative record, including the 

transcript of Shrestha’s merits hearing, the applications for 

relief, and all supporting evidence. We conclude that the 

record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the 

administrative findings of fact, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) 

(2012), and that substantial evidence supports the Board’s 

decision to uphold the denial of the applications for relief. 

See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). We 

accordingly deny the petition for review for the reasons stated 

by the Board. See In re: Shrestha (B.I.A. May 7, 2015). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

 * Shreshtha failed to challenge the agency’s denial of his 

request for protection under the Convention Against Torture. He 

has therefore waived appellate review of this claim. See

Suarez-Valenzuela v. Holder, 714 F.3d 241, 248-49 (4th Cir. 

2013).
3

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. 

PETITION DENIED
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*ALEX MALAVE

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 15898.

*Brien P. Horan*and *Lisa Gizzi,*in support of the petition.

Decided March 25, 1998

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 47 Conn. App. 597 (AC 15615), is granted, limited to the following issue:

> “As a matter of policy, should the adverse witness rule of *Secondino*v. *New Haven Gas Co.,*147 Conn. 672 (1960), be abandoned?”