alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 77 (Wednesday, April 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 22561]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09342]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Drug Enforcement Administration

[Docket No. DEA-392]


Importer of Controlled Substances Application: Stepan Company

ACTION: Notice of application.

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

DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class, and 
applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the 
issuance of the proposed registration in accordance with 21 CFR 
1301.34(a) on or before May 22, 2015. Such persons may also file a 
written request for a hearing on the application pursuant to 21 CFR 
1301.43 on or before May 22, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement 
Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/ODXL, 
8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. Request for 
hearings should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: 
Hearing Clerk/LJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. 
Comments and request for hearings on applications to import narcotic 
raw material are not appropriate. 72 FR 3417 (January 25, 2007).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Attorney General has delegated his 
authority under the Controlled Substances Act to the Administrator of 
of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), 28 CFR 0.100(b). 
Authority to exercise all necessary functions with respect to the 
promulgation and implementation of 21 CFR part 1301, incident to the 
registration of manufacturers, distributors, dispensers, importers, and 
exporters of controlled substances (other than final orders in 
connection with suspension, denial, or revocation of registration) has 
been redelegated to the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the DEA 
Office of Diversion Control (``Deputy Assistant Administrator'') 
pursuant to section 7 of 28 CFR part 0, appendix to subpart R.
    In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on 
February 9, 2015, Stepan Company, Natural Products Dept., 100 W. Hunter 
Avenue, Maywood, New Jersey 07607 applied to be registered as an 
importer of coca leaves (9040), a basic class of controlled substance 
listed in schedule II.
    The company plans to import the listed controlled substance to 
manufacture bulk controlled substances for distribution to its 
customers.

    Dated: April 14, 2015.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-09342 Filed 4-21-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
#### City of Port Huron v Harris,

No. 90687.

*Summary Dispositions August 30, 1991:*

In lieu of granting leave to appeal, the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted. MCR 7.302(F)(1). Court of Appeals No. 131834.
```

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 1 (Monday, January 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 82-83]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28419]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural 
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP22-436-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Negotiated Rate Agreements 
Update (Devon/Direct Energy/Conoco) to be effective 2/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/27/21.
    Accession Number: 20211227-5059.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/22.

    Docket Numbers: RP22-437-000.
    Applicants: El Paso Natural Gas Company, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Non-Conforming Agreements 
Filing (WTG) to be effective 2/1/2022.
    Filed Date: 12/27/21.
    Accession Number: 20211227-5073.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 1/10/22.

    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above 
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be 
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the 
proceeding.
    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by 
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing 
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying 
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/

[[Page 83]]

docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 
208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: December 27, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-28419 Filed 12-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```
ENCLOSURE 2 

State Implementation Plan Completeness Checklist 

SIP COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST 

SUBMITTAL OF THE SECTION 189(d) soA REASONABLE FURTHER PROGRESS 

PM-10 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) REVISION 

FOR THE MARICOPA COUNTY AND APACHE JUNCTION (METROPOLITAN 

PHOENIX) NONATTAINMENT AREA 

1. SUBMITTAL LETTER FROM GOVERNORIDESIGhTEE 

Included. 

2. EVIDENCE OF ADOPTION 

See Submittal Letter. 

3. STATE LEGAL AUTHOIUTY FOR ADOPTION/IMPLEMENTATION 

See Enclosure 1. 

4. COMPLETE COPY OF ACTUAL REGULATIONS 

See Enclosure 3 (Commitment Resolutions MAG Volumes 1 and 2; Pinal County 

Paving Commitment and Open Burn Ordinances) 

5. EVIDENCE THAT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT REQUIREMENTS MET 

See Enclosure 3 (MAG Appendix D and Pinal County enclosures) 

6 EVIDENCE OF PUBLIC HEARING 

See Enclosure 3 (MAG Appendix D and Pinal County enclosures) 

7 PUBLIC COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSE 

See Enclosure 3 (MAG Appendix D and Pinal County enclosures) 

Page 1 of 3 
8. IDENTIFICATION OF POLLUTANTS REGULATED BY RULE 

Particulate Matter 10 microns in size and smaller (PM-1 0) 

9. IDENTIFICATION OF SOURCESIATTAINMENT STATUS 

This SIP contains an updated inventory of particulate matter sources in the Maricopa 

County PMlo Nonattainrnent Serious Area (see MAG Appendix B). 

10. WRITTEN SUMMARY OF RULEIRULE CHANGE 

See Enclosure 3 and Pinal County enclosures 

11. RULE CHANGES INDICATED BY UNDERLINING AND CROSS-OUTS 

See Enclosure 3 and Pinal County enclosures 

12. RULE EFFECTS ON EMISSIONS 

The effects of the control measures package can be found in Chapters 7 and 8 of the 

MAG Plan 

13 DEMONSTRATION THAT NAAQS, PSD INCREMENTS AND RFP ARE 

PROTECTED 

See Chapters 7 and 8 of the MAG Plan. 

14. EVIDENCE THAT EMISSIONS LIMITATIONS ARE BASED ON CONTINUOUS 

EMISSIONS REDUCTION TECHNOLOGY 

Not applicable. 

15. MODELING SUPPORT 

See Appendix I of the MAG Plan. 

16. IDENTIFICATIONS OF SECTIONS OF RULE CONTAINING EMISSION LIMITS, 

WORK PRACTICE STANDARDS, AND/OR RECORD KEEPINGIREPORTING 

REQUIREMENTS 

See Commitment Resolutions MAG Volumes 1 and 2; Pinal County Paving 

Commitment and Open Burn Ordinances. 

Page 2 of 3 
17. COMPLIANCEIENFORCEMENT STRATEGIES 

See Commitment Resolutions MAG Volumes 1 and 2; Pinal County Paving 

Commitment and Open Burn Ordinances. 

18. ECONOMIC TECHNICAL JUSTIFICATION FOR DEVIATION FROM EPA 

POLICIES 

No known deviation from EPA policy. 

Page 3 of 3
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

Chester L. Watkins, :

 :

 Plaintiff, : 

 : Case No. 3:17cv00322 

 vs. : 

 : District Judge Thomas M. Rose 

Commissioner of the Social : Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington 

Security Administration, :

 :

 Defendant. : 

 

DECISION AND ENTRY

 The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendations of United States 

Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington (Doc. #9), to whom this case was originally 

referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed 

thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) has 

expired, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations. 

 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that: 

1. The Report and Recommendations docketed on March 29, 2018 (Doc. #9) 

is ADOPTED in full; 

 2. Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 41(b); and 

 

 3. The case is terminated on the docket of this Court. 

 

 _______________________ 

 Thomas M. Rose 

 United States District Judge
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4275 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 429
111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4275

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 15, 2010

 Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

                             June 15, 2010

               Reported by Mrs. Boxer, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the annex building under construction for the Elbert P. 
Tuttle United States Court of Appeals Building in Atlanta, Georgia, as 
               the ``John C. Godbold Federal Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The annex building under construction for the United States 
courthouse located at 56 Forsyth Street in Atlanta, Georgia, known as 
the Elbert P. Tuttle United States Court of Appeals Building, shall be 
known and designated as the ``John C. Godbold Federal Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the annex building referred to in 
section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``John C. Godbold 
Federal Building''.
                                                       Calendar No. 429

111th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 4275

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the annex building under construction for the Elbert P. 
Tuttle United States Court of Appeals Building in Atlanta, Georgia, as 
               the ``John C. Godbold Federal Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             June 15, 2010

                       Reported without amendment
```
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-10204

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

LORENZO SALGADO,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:14-CR-52-1

Before WIENER, HIGGINSON, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Lorenzo Salgado

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Salgado has not filed a response, has completed the 

confinement portion of his sentence, and has been removed from the United 

States. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 30, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-10204 Document: 00513213159 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/30/2015
No. 15-10204

2

record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal 

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED in part as frivolous, 

see 5TH CIR. R. 42.2, and in part as moot, see United States v. RosenbaumAlanis, 483 F.3d 381, 382-83 (5th Cir. 2007).

 Case: 15-10204 Document: 00513213159 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/30/2015
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :

Plaintiff, : Case No. 3:17-CR-146-3

-vs- : Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington

DAVID D. CRABTREE, :

Defendant. :

 ORDER APPOINTING COUNSEL UNDER THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT

This case is before the Court upon Defendant’s application for appointment of counsel

pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3006A. Upon the Court’s Sua Sponte Order for Appointment of Counsel,

the Court appointed a member of the Criminal Justice Act Panel.

IT IS ACCORDINGLY ORDERED that Lawrence J. Greger, of the CJA Panel for the

Southern District of Ohio, is appointed as counsel to represent the Defendant in this case.

September 20, 2017 s/Sharon L. Ovington 

 Sharon L. Ovington

 United States Magistrate Judge
[ DO NOT PUBLISH] 

## In the 

# United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________ No. 20

- 12547

____________________ In Re: Mosaic Management Group, Inc., Debtor.

___________________________________________________

___ UNITED STATES TRUSTEE REGION 21, Plaintiff

- Appellee Cross

- Appellant,

versus BAST AMRON LLP,

Defendant

- Appellant Cross

- Appellee. USCA11 Case: 20-12547 Document: 121-1 Date Filed: 08/08/2024 Page: 1 of 22 Opinion of the Court 20

- 12547

____________________ Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 16

- bk

- 20833

- EPK

____________________ Before J ORDAN , B RASHER , and A NDERSON , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: On June 24, 2024, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded our opinion in In re Mosaic Mgmt. Grp., Inc. , 71 F.4th 1341 (11th Cir. 2023), in light of United States Trustee v. John Q. Hammons Fall 2006, LLC , 602 U. S. ___ (2024). United States Tr. Region 21 v. Bast Amron LLP , No. 23

- 278, 2024 WL 3089471 (U.S. June 24, 2024)

. We now vacate the bankruptcy court’s decision and remand for proceedings to implement the Supreme Court’s decision in Hammons

. VACATED and REMANDED. USCA11 Case: 20-12547 Document: 121-1 Date Filed: 08/08/2024 Page: 2 of 2
#### People v Shephard,

No. 90327;

Court of Appeals No. 114614.
#### Gearlene Hemingway, Appellant, v U.S. Bank National, Respondent.

[772 NYS2d 536]

In an action pursuant to RPAFL article 15 to compel the determination of claims to certain real property, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Barone, J.), dated February 21, 2002, which denied her motion to stay her eviction from the subject premises and to vacate a judgment of foreclosure and sale of the premises dated February 16, 2000.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant’s arguments regarding the judgment of foreclosure were previously determined in a prior foreclosure action commenced against the appellant and resolved against her and thus are barred by the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel *(see O’Brien v City of Syracuse,*54 NY2d 353 [1981]; *Matter of Kleiger-Brown v Brown,*306 AD2d 482 [2003]; *Mercury Capital Corp. v Shepherds Beach,*305 AD2d 471 [2003]). The motion for a stay and vacatur based on these arguments was providently denied.

The appellant’s remaining contention is without merit. S. Miller, J.P., H. Miller, Crane and Rivera, JJ., concur.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-22-00323-CR

No. 02-22-00324-CR

___________________________

On Appeal from the 78th District Court

Wichita County, Texas

Trial Court Nos. DC78-CR2022-0752-1, DC78-CR2022-0752-2

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Birdwell, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth

NOEL RAMIREZ MARTIN, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Noel Ramirez Martin attempts to appeal his convictions, but he

waived his right of appeal as part of his plea bargain with the State.

Martin was charged with murder, unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon,

and possession of a controlled substance. After a jury found him guilty of the first 

two charges, the State offered to dismiss the third charge if Martin agreed to 40 years’

confinement for murder and 10 years’ confinement for unlawful possession.

1

 Martin 

agreed, and the trial court entered judgments of conviction in accordance with the

plea bargain.2

“In a plea bargain case . . . a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that 

were raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, (B) after getting the trial

court’s permission to appeal, or (C) where the specific appeal is expressly authorized 

by statute.” Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2); see Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.02. The 

trial court must file a certification of the defendant’s right of appeal, clarifying 

whether the case involved a plea bargain and whether the defendant waived his right

of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d).

1The plea bargain provided that Martin’s two sentences would run 

concurrently.

2The trial court also imposed a fine of $100 for Martin’s unlawful possession of 

a firearm, which appears to have been part of the plea bargain as well.
3

Martin’s judgments of conviction state that “[a] Plea Agreement was reached,”

and the trial court signed certifications confirming that “the defendant has waived the 

right of appeal” and that the cases are “plea-bargain case[s], and the defendant has 

NO right of appeal.”

3 Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2), (d).

Because criminal appeals “must be dismissed if a certification that shows the 

defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record,” Tex. R. App.

P. 25.2(d), we informed Martin that we could dismiss his appeals unless he showed

grounds for continuing them. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3. Martin responded 

with a letter raising a myriad of complaints about the trial court proceedings. But 

none of his complaints address our jurisdictional concerns or show grounds for 

continuing his appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

Accordingly, we dismiss Martin’s appeals. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 43.2(f).

/s/ Bonnie Sudderth

Bonnie Sudderth

Chief Justice

Do Not Publish

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

Delivered: March 9, 2023

3The certifications were signed not only by the trial court but also by Martin 

and Martin’s trial counsel. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d).
TradeOn Inc.: Exhibit 10.10 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com











Exhibit 10.10 


Summary of Guaranty Contract of Maximum Amount 


Summary of Guaranty Contract of Maximum Amount ( the “Contract”) Entered into by and between Changzhou Wujin Best Cable Co., Ltd. (the “Guarantor”) and Wujin Branch, Agricultural Bank of
China (the “Creditor”) Dated June 20, 2009  


Main contents: 

	
Guaranty Contract number: 32905200900003022.

	
Changzhou Best Appliance Cable Co., Ltd. undertakes to assume joint and several liabilities for Changzhou Shunfeng Packing Vessel Co., Ltd. (the “Obligor”)’s indebtedness towards Agricultural Bank of China occurred from June 20, 2009
to December 31, 2010, and the maximum amount secured is RMB 15 million.

	

Guaranty Responsibility: The guaranty under this Contract shall be guaranty with joint and several liabilities. The Guarantor is obligated to pay off the debt in the event the Obligor is unable to pay off the debt (including the Creditor
declares the debt becomes mature in advance to its original expiry date due to default of the Obligor or the Guarantor).

	

Scope of Guaranty: The guaranty shall cover all of the loan principal, interest, penalty interest, breach of contract compensation, damages, undertaking fee and all the expenses such as litigation cost, lawyer’s fee, notification cost
and public notice cost etc. which is incurred to the Creditor in realizing its creditor’s right.

	

Guaranty Period: The guaranty period is from the effective date of this Contract to two years after the expiry of the term of relevant agreements entered into under the Contract.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

JASMAINE N. HAGOOD,
Plaintiff,
v. . Case No. 3:17-cv-273

ANDREW SAUL, Commissioner JUDGE WALTER H. RICE
of Social Security,

Defendant.

DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
(DOC. #25); OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM
JUDGMENT (DOC. #23); OVERRULING PLAINTIFF'S “MOTION TO
REOPEN CASE PURSUANT TO CFR 404.989” (DOC. #28); CASE
TO REMAIN TERMINATED ON DOCKET

On September 24, 2018, the Court issued a Decision and Entry affirming
the Commissioner's decision that Plaintiff was not disabled and terminating the
case. Doc. #21. One year later, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Reopen Case and Relief
from a Judgment or Order Under Federal Rule 60(b), Doc. #23. Defendant filed a
response. Doc. #24.

On October 29, 2019, United States Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman
filed a Report and Recommendations, Doc. #25, recommending that the Court
overrule Plaintiff's motion. Although Plaintiff was notified of her right to file
Objections to that Report and Recommendations, and of the consequences of

failing to do so, no Objections were filed within the time allotted.


Based on the reasoning and citations of authority set forth by Magistrate
Judge Newman in the Report and Recommendations, as well as upon a thorough
de novo review of this Court's file and the applicable law, the Court ADOPTS said
judicial filing, Doc. #25, and OVERRULES Plaintiff's Motion to Reopen Case and
Relief from a Judgment or Order Under Federal Rule 60(b), Doc. #23.

The Court notes that, on December 23, 2019, Plaintiff filed a “Motion to
Reopen Case Pursuant to CFR 404.989,” Doc. #28, attaching new medical records.
The Court presumes that this is a reference to 20 C.F.R. § 404.989, which permits
the Social Security Administration to reopen a determination if new and material
evidence is furnished. Any such request, however, must be addressed to the
Social Security Administration, not to the Court. Accordingly, the Court
OVERRULES Plaintiff's Motion to Reopen Case Pursuant to CFR 404.989, Doc. #28.

The above-captioned case shall remain terminated on the Court's docket.

Date: January 2, 2020 CALM us
WALTER H. RICE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4203 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs to provide veterans certain educational assistance payments 

through direct deposit. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 3, 2009 

Mr. HALL of New York introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide veterans certain 

educational assistance payments through direct deposit. 

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

3 SECTION 1. EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS 

4 THROUGH DIRECT DEPOSIT. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3323 of title 38, United 

6 States Code, is amended— 

7 (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as sub8 section (d); and 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4203 IH

1 (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the fol2 lowing new subsection: 

3 ‘‘(c) DIRECT DEPOSIT.—Except as provided in sec4 tion 3313(g), the Secretary shall ensure that a veteran 

5 may receive payments for assistance under this chapter 

6 directly in the bank account of such veteran.’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS