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

Regulatory Evaluation 

Docket N o . FAA2ot S"=-ltiM- 07'g - AS\ Directorate Identifier: -AD ' I..1.J 

([.FOil make clwnges to the values in the wble he/ow, you nwsl ensure the totals update ac:cvrdingly. (/ 

they do not, d ick (or Tab) into and then out of the c:lumged cell. 

Estima ted Costs: 

Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

(e.g ., Inspection, propeller, appliance) 

Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor + u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do not include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered 

and close-up) our) Products 

I HSpeetiorr r.o--' ~ ' I -148 I 

Installation 

~r; ". {I• I $100,000. • I 

• it ~ I I 38 ' fsU 

~ II i t•J . ') "II . ' .. ; 

\ II 'I; I I I !I < 

., II (\I I I til ' !' • '~' 

,, l '-· " II t1 'I r: 

Ill' \tit ' .II 

1, iJ•I I'P • j 1'! 

l 0• 1 II Oil •l' I• 

" I) (JIJ ' 'I l:IJ ., 

' 11\li () I •I' )II 

I) II! ., 'II) 

•, f' i}li I . .. ' 

''I •, ,, .,,, 

'• I II 

') lj();l ' ''·"' 

' li lli' {illil 

'1', ,, ,,, ' . I ,., 

., " 

The known number of products in compliance : 0 

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: S4,772,2JO 

Costs covered under warranty (if/mown) $ 

On-Con dition Costs: ~ 

Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product 

(e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) 

testing, and closereplacement) up) 

' 'l f:t. ..: I 1'(1 

''" '• \ lo ;, 

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that wa~ assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs): 
Executive Order 12866: 

Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory acti "?~ 

YES* D NO IZl 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

Is the AD significant? ~ 

YES* D NO~ 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act: 

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answe .~· 

YESD NO~ 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: 

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? @ , 

YES*0 NO~ 

*Explanation:
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 127 (Wednesday, September 19, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H6151]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. SMITH of New Jersey:
       H.R. 6436.
        Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Article 1, Sec. 8: To regulate Commerce with foreign 
     Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian 
     Tribes; To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper 
     for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all 
     other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of 
     the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
```
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 1009 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. 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 on Aging Special Emphasis Panel; REDI Small Business Review Panel.                    

*Date:*                         March 15, 2024.                    

*Time:*                         12:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Ivan Tadeu Rebustini, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute on Aging, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, Gateway Bldg., Suite 100, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 555-1212,                         *ivan.rebustini@nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: December 28, 2023. 

Miguelina Perez, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-28954 Filed 1-3-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-6735

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JOSHUA STRADER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. 

(2:08-cr-01152-DCN-1)

Submitted: July 23, 2015 Decided: July 28, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joshua Strader, Appellant Pro Se. Matthew J. Modica, Assistant 

United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Joshua Strader appeals the district court’s order denying his

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2012) motion for a sentence reduction based 

on Amendment 782 to the Sentencing Guidelines. We have reviewed 

the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm 

for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. 

Strader, No. 2:08-cr-01152-DCN-1 (D.S.C. Apr. 23, 2015). We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions 

are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Executive Summary Template

Please use this template to complete the Executive Summary for your project 

application. Remember to be asconcise as possible (Note: You must delete the text in 

each field prior to filling out the form)

Project Title:

Name: 

Impacted Counties:

Basic Agency: For Construction Projects ONLY (Please choose from the list below)

Goal/Objective:

Project Purpose:
Funding:

Project Description: 1-2 Paragraphs 

Strategic Rationale: 1 paragraph MAX

Source Amount Percentage 

ARC

Federal (Other)

State

Other (Applicant, 

Donation, etc.)

Total 
Collaborative Partnerships: 1 paragraph MAX

Project Sustainability and Capacity: 1 paragraph MAX

Performance Measures:
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**Certification of President and Chief Operating Officer**

 

**Pursuant to**

 

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended **March 31, 2004** (the “Report”) of**MCG Capital Corporation** (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, **Steven F. Tunney**, the President and Chief Operating Officer of the Registrant, hereby certify, to thebest of my knowledge, that: 

 

(1) The Report fully complies withthe requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theRegistrant.
EXHIBIT 99.1
 
 QUESTCOR ANNOUNCES CFO TRANSITION PLAN
 Union City, CA  August 5, 2008  Questcor Pharmaceuticals, Inc
   About Questcor
 ® ®




---



##### 



www.questcor.com
 Note: Except for the historical information contained herein, this press release contains
forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Such statements are subject to
certain factors, which may cause Questcors results to differ from those reported herein. Factors
that may cause such differences include, but are not limited to, Questcors ability to continue to
successfully implement the new strategy and business model for Acthar, the introduction of
competitive products, Questcors ability to accurately forecast the demand for its products, the
gross margin achieved from the sale of its products, Questcors ability to enforce its product
returns policy, Questcors ability to estimate the quantity of Acthar used by government entities
and Medicaid eligible patients, that the actual amount of rebates and discounts related to the use
of Acthar by government entities and Medicaid eligible patients may differ materially from
Questcors estimates, the sell-through by Questcors distributors, the expenses and other cash
needs for upcoming periods, the inventories carried by Questcors distributors, specialty
pharmacies and hospitals, volatility in Questcors monthly and quarterly Acthar shipments and
end-user demand, Questcors ability to obtain finished goods from its sole source contract
manufacturers on a timely basis if at all, Questcors ability to attract and retain key management
personnel, Questcors ability to utilize its net operating loss carry forwards to reduce income
taxes on taxable income, research and development risks, uncertainties regarding Questcors
intellectual property and the uncertainty of receiving required regulatory approvals in a timely
way, or at all, other research, development, and regulatory risks, and the ability of Questcor to
acquire products and, if acquired, to market them successfully and find marketing partners where
appropriate, as well as the risks discussed in Questcors annual report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2007 and other documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The
risk factors and other information contained in these documents should be considered in evaluating
Questcors prospects and future financial performance.
 CONTACT INFORMATION:      IR2@Questcor.com
 EVC Group, Inc.Investors
    
    MediaDoug Sherk
    
    Steve DiMattia415-896-6820
    
    646-201-5447Dahlia Bailey415-896-6820
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 129 (Friday, September 21, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H6277]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. GARAMENDI:
       H.R. 6484.
       Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Commerce clause found in Art. 1, Section 8 of the United 
     States Constitution.
```
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the periodic report of Abraxis BioScience, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Patrick Soon-Shiong, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |  |  |                              
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------
|                       |  | 
|Date: November 9, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ PATRICK SOON-SHIONG, M.D.
|                       |  |  |  | Patrick Soon-Shiong, M.D.    
|                       |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer      

This certification accompanies this Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification
will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
*The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-3419

___________

Kathy L. Loeckle, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Northern

* District of Iowa.

State Farm Mutual Automobile *

Insurance Company; State Farm Fire & * [UNPUBLISHED]

Casualty Company, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: April 10, 2000

Filed: April 25, 2000

___________

Before McMILLIAN and FAGG, Circuit Judges, and ROSENBAUM,* District Judge.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Kathy L. Loeckle appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment

on Loeckle's disability and age-based employment discrimination lawsuit. Loeckle

contends on appeal that the district court applied the wrong standard in determining

Loeckle was an employee of State Farm Fire & Casualty Company and was not an
-2-

employee of State Farm Automobile Insurance Company. Even assuming the district

court did not apply the appropriate standard, we see no reversible error because the

undisputed evidence presented at summary judgment establishes that Loeckle was an

employee only of State Farm Fire & Casualty Company. Because the parties' materials

show they are thoroughly familiar with the issues before the court, we also conclude

that an extensive discussion is unnecessary. Having carefully reviewed the record and

the parties' submissions, we believe the district court correctly granted summary

judgment. We thus affirm without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4936 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4936

                 For the relief of Joel Perez Hernandez.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 2018

    Ms. Clarke of New York introduced the following bill; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                 For the relief of Joel Perez Hernandez.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR JOEL PEREZ HERNANDEZ.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151), Joel Perez 
Hernandez shall be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or for 
adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for 
permanent residence upon filing an application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa under section 204 of that Act (8 U.S.C. 1154) or for 
adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--If Joel Perez Hernandez enters the 
United States before the filing deadline specified in subsection (c), 
Joel Perez Hernandez shall be considered to have entered and remained 
lawfully and shall be eligible for adjustment of status under section 
245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255) as of the 
date of enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Numbers.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Joel Perez Hernandez, the 
Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, 
during the current or next following fiscal year, the total number of 
immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
birth of Joel Perez Hernandez under section 203(a) of the Immigration 
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)) or, if applicable, the total 
number of immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the 
country of birth of Joel Perez Hernandez under section 202(e) of that 
Act (8 U.S.C. 1152(e)).
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Joel Perez 
Hernandez shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded any 
right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>   1


EXHIBIT 23.1








              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS






The Board of Directors
Hallmark Capital Corp.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the subject registration statement
(No. 33-80-700) on Form S-8 of Hallmark Capital Corp. of our report dated July
31, 1998, relating to the consolidated statements of financial condition of
Hallmark Capital Corp. and subsidiary as of June 30, 1998 and 1997, and the
related consolidated statements of income, shareholders' equity and cash flows
for each of the years in the three-year period ended June 30, 1998, which report
appears in the June 30, 1998 annual report on Form 10-K of Hallmark Capital
Corp.


                                                          KPMG PEAT MARWICK, LLP



Milwaukee, Wisconsin
September 23, 1998








                                     -105-
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4890 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4890

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 9801 Apollo Drive in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, as the ``Wayne K. 
                     Curry Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 29, 2018

   Mr. Brown of Maryland (for himself, Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Cummings, Mr. 
 Ruppersberger, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Harris, Mr. Delaney, and Mr. Raskin) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                    Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 9801 Apollo Drive in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, as the ``Wayne K. 
                     Curry Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. WAYNE K. CURRY POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 9801 Apollo Drive in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Wayne K. Curry Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Wayne K. 
Curry Post Office Building''.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1728

In re: JOHN WILLIAMS MILLER,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Columbia. (3:20-cv-00844-TMC)

Submitted: August 7, 2023 Decided: August 16, 2023

Before HARRIS and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petitions denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Williams Miller, Petitioner Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1728 Doc: 21 Filed: 08/16/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

John Williams Miller petitions for a writ of mandamus seeking an order directing 

the district court to reinstate his employment discrimination action and enter judgment in 

his favor. Miller also seeks to strike or revise various entries in the district court’s docket 

report. We conclude that Miller is not entitled to mandamus relief.

Mandamus relief is a drastic remedy and should be used only in extraordinary 

circumstances. Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004); In re Murphy-Brown, 

LLC, 907 F.3d 788, 795 (4th Cir. 2018). Further, mandamus relief is available only when 

the petitioner has a clear right to the relief sought and “has no other adequate means to 

attain the relief [he] desires.” Murphy-Brown, 907 F.3d at 795 (alteration and internal 

quotation marks omitted). Mandamus may not be used as a substitute for appeal. In re 

Lockheed Martin Corp., 503 F.3d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 2007). 

The relief Miller seeks is not available by way of mandamus. Indeed, he has already 

had an opportunity to appeal the district court’s orders, and we affirmed the denial of relief. 

See Miller v. Apple, Inc., No. 22-2055, 2023 WL 4181279, at *1 (4th Cir. June 26, 2023). 

Accordingly, we deny the mandamus petition and amended mandamus petition. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

PETITIONS DENIED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1728 Doc: 21 Filed: 08/16/2023 Pg: 2 of 2