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 State

          - [Public Notice 11639]

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that a certain object, entitled “A Banquet Still Life” by Jan Davidsz. de Heem, being imported from abroad pursuant to an agreement with its foreign owner or custodian for temporary conservation, scientific research, and exhibition or display at The J. Paul Getty Museum at the Getty Center, Los Angeles, California, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, is of cultural significance, and, further, that its temporary conservation, scientific research, and exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned are in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the                         **Federal Register**                        .                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Chi D. Tran, Program Administrator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:                         *section2459@state.gov*). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, Washington, DC 20522-0505.                    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,                     *et seq.;*22 U.S.C. 6501 note,                     *et seq.*), Delegation of Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 2021.                

Stacy E. White,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.

[FR Doc. 2022-01578 Filed 1-26-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
June 26, 2015 

Mr. Marcel Piet 

ArgenTech Solutions, Inc. 

16701 SE. McGillivray Suite 210 

Vancouver, WA 98683 

Dear Mr. Piet: 

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

§§ 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.109, 91.119, 91.151, 91.203(a) and (b), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1) and 91.409(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It 

explains why we cannot process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days. 

Why We Cannot Process Your Request 

We entered your April 21, 2015, exemption request on behalf of ArgenTech Solutions, Inc. 

into the public docket (No. FAA−2015−1500), but we are unable to process your request any 

further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy 

enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following: 

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

benefit the public as a whole. 

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

What You Should Do 

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

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

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

If We Do Not Hear From You 

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

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

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Brenda Robeson 

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

 EASTERN DIVISION AT COLUMBUS

DANIEL B. BRAGG, 

Petitioner, : Case No. 2:18-cv-762 

- vs - District Judge Algenon L. Marbley 

Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz 

WARDEN, 

 Pickaway Correctional Institution, 

 

 : 

 Respondent. 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

 

 This habeas corpus case under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, brought pro se by Petitioner Daniel 

Bragg, is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendations (ECF No. 13) 

recommending that Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment (ECF No. 13) should be denied. 

Petitioner was notified in the Report that any objections he might have to the Report were required 

to be filed not later than seventeen days after the Report was served on him. The docket reflects 

service was made June 5, 2020, but no objections have been filed and the time for doing so has 

expired. 

 Accordingly, the Report and Recommendations is ADOPTED and Petitioner’s Motion for 

Relief from Judgment (ECF No. 13) is DENIED. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree 

with this conclusion, Petitioner is denied a certificate of appealability and the Court certifies to the 

Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and should not be permitted to proceed 

in forma pauperis. 

Case: 2:18-cv-00762-ALM-MRM Doc #: 14 Filed: 09/28/20 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 65
2 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

September 28, 2020. _____________________________ 

 Algenon L. Marbley, Chief Judge 

 

Case: 2:18-cv-00762-ALM-MRM Doc #: 14 Filed: 09/28/20 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 66
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Record of Meeting

DATE: October 27, 2015 EPA ATTENDEES: Wren Stenger, Guy Donaldson, Barbara Nann, Josh Olszewski, Dayana Medina VISITORS: Becky Keogh (ADEQ), Stuart Spencer (ADEQ), Stev e Lorio (Entergy), Heather Naeher (Entergy), Kurt Castleberry (Entergy), Kelly McQueen (Entergy), Bill Bumpers (Baker & Botts) This meeting was in response to a request from th e visitors for an opportunity to meet with EPA to go over the written comments submitted by En tergy during the public comment period on the proposed Arkansas Regional Haze FIP, and to answer any questions from EPA regarding the submitted comments. See “AR020.0166 Entergy Ar kansas Inc. comments on EPA-R06-OAR2015-0189-0153,” which can be found in the docket for the Arkansas RH FIP rulemaking (Docket ID: EPA–R06–OAR–2015–0189).

The topics discussed included the following:

 Entergy’s alternative proposal with re gard to White Bluff and Independence.

 Entergy clarified that under the company’s al ternative proposal, White Bluff Units 1 and 2 would meet the interim SO2 emission limit of 0.6 lb/MMBtu and Independence Units 1 and 2 would meet the SO2 emission limit of 0.6 lb/MMBtu by burning lower sulfur coal.

 Entergy also discussed that due to cha nges in the dispatch of White Bluff and Independence, the company no longer expects the units to be able to consistently meet a NOx emission limit of 0.15 lb/MMBtu on a 30-day boiler operating day rolling average.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION 1 

April 22, 2016 

Mr. Jeffrey Crawford 

Bureau of Air Quality 

5 POST OFFICE SQUARE, SUITE 100 

BOSTON, MA 02109-3912 

Maine Department of Environmental Protection 

17 State House Station 

Augusta, ME 0433 

Dear Mr. Crawford: 

Thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments on the Maine Department of 

Environmental Protection's (DEP) proposed revisions to Chapter 100, Definitions. EPA 

appreciates Maine DEP's effort in revising Chapter 100 as it relates to the state's Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting program. We have provided one comment below 

concerning how Maine DEP calculates the baseline concentration of particulate matter less than 

2.5 micrometers in diameter (commonly referred to as PM2.s) for purposes of an ambient 

increment detennination. 

The Chapter 100 definition of"ambient increment," states: 

"To identify baseline emissions from a source for ambient increment determination, the 

Department shall presume actual emissions from ... Calendar year 2012 (emphasis 

added) for PM2.s." Chapter I 00(11 ). 

The Chapter 100 definition of "baseline concentration," states: 

"The actual PM2.s emissions increases or decreases at any source occurring after October 

20, 2010 (emphasis added), shall not be included in the baseline concentration but shall 

be included in the determination of the increment consumed." Chapter 100(16)(A)(3). 

The dates contained in the above definitions are in conflict with one another. Maine DEP should 

revise the definition of "ambient increment" to require actual PM2.s emissions from calendar year 

2010 be used (in lieu of calendar year 2012) for purposes of determining baseline emissions in an 

ambient increment determination. 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed revisions to Chapter 100 as it relates 

to the state's PSD pennitting program. If you have any questions, please contact Patrick Bird at 

( 617) 918-1287. 

Strt, tJ, fo> 

Ida E. McDonnell, Manager 

Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit 

Toll Free • 1-888-372-7341 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov/region 1 

Recycled/Recyclable •Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postconsumer)
Amendment to Executive Deferred Compensation Plan - Merging of Plan



 Exhibit 10.29 
 AMENDMENT 
 TO 
 THE GAP, INC. EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN 
 WHEREAS, The Gap,
Inc. (the “Company”) maintains The Gap, Inc. Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”), as amended and restated effective January 1, 1999; and 
 WHEREAS, the Plan previously has been amended; and 
 WHEREAS, further amendment of the Plan now is considered desirable to provide for the merger of the Plan into The Gap, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan (prior to March 2, 2009 known as the Gap Inc. Supplemental Deferred Compensation
Plan); 
 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED that, pursuant to the power reserved to the Company under Section 9.2 of the Plan, and in
exercise of the authority delegated to the undersigned officer by resolutions of the Board of Directors of the Company dated November 19, 2008, the Plan is hereby amended by adding a new Supplement A to the Plan, in the form attached hereto.

 *        *        * 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned officer has executed this amendment on behalf of the Company,
this 24th day of November, 2008. 
  

			
	THE GAP, INC.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Williams Tompkins
		 	Sr. Vice President, Total Rewards









 APPENDIX A 
 Special Provisions Relating to the Merger of 
 The Gap, Inc. Executive Deferred Compensation Plan
into 
 The Gap, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan 
 (prior to March 2, 2009 known as the 
 Gap Inc. Supplemental Deferred Compensation Plan) 

 A-1. Introduction. The Gap, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Plan and The Gap, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan (prior
to March 2, 2009 known as the Gap Inc. Supplemental Deferred Compensation Plan) (“SDCP”) for the benefit of certain of its eligible employees. Effective as of the beginning of business on March 2, 2009 (the “Merger
Date”), the Plan shall be merged into, and continued in the form of, the SDCP. 
 A-2. Participation. Each Plan Participant who
had an account balance on the last business day prior to the Merger Date shall automatically become a participant in the SDCP on the Merger Date, to the extent he had not already begun participating in the SDCP prior to the Merger Date. 

A-3. Merger. Effective on the Merger Date, the Plan shall be merged into the SDCP. The merger into the SDCP and the transfer of notional
amounts shall comply with the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, as amended, and section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code, to the extent deemed necessary and desirable by the Company. 
 A-4. Transfer of Accounts. All notional amounts credited to notional accounts maintained under the Plan for Participants shall be adjusted
as of the Merger Date in accordance with the terms of the Plan. The net credit balances in such notional accounts, as adjusted, shall be transferred to the SDCP and credited as of the Merger Date to the corresponding notional accounts already
maintained for SDCP Participants in the same amounts as the Participants’ notional accounts had been invested under the Plan, to the extent determined by the Investment Committee and, at the discretion of the Investment Committee, as directed
by the Participant. 
  

 - 2 -
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 63 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 63

    Providing for congressional disapproval of the proposed direct 
commercial sale to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia of certain weaponry and 
                               munitions.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           November 12, 2021

   Ms. Omar (for herself, Ms. Tlaib, and Mr. McGovern) submitted the 
  following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                            Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Providing for congressional disapproval of the proposed direct 
commercial sale to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia of certain weaponry and 
                               munitions.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the issuance of a license 
for the export with respect to any of the following transfers to the 
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is prohibited:
            (1) The transfer of the following defense articles, 
        described in license document DDTC 20-11, submitted to Congress 
        pursuant to section 36(c) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 
        U.S.C. 2776(c)) on November 4, 2021: The proposed transfer of 
        two hundred eighty (280) AIM-120C-7/C-8 Advanced Medium Range 
        Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) and five hundred ninety-six (596) 
        LAU-128 Missile Rail Launchers (MRL); containers; weapon 
        support and support equipment; spare and repair parts; U.S. 
        Government and contractor engineering, technical and logistical 
        support services; and other related elements of logistical and 
        program support.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 522 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 522

 Electing Robert M. Duncan, of the District of Columbia, as Secretary 
                    for the Majority of the Senate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 27, 2020

Mr. McConnell submitted the following resolution; which was considered 
                             and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Electing Robert M. Duncan, of the District of Columbia, as Secretary 
                    for the Majority of the Senate.

    Resolved, That Robert M. Duncan of the District of Columbia be, and 
he is hereby, elected Secretary for the Majority of the Senate.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          79,975
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  404,034
<ALLOWANCES>                                    91,307
<INVENTORY>                                     22,974
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               455,257
<PP&E>                                         800,716
<DEPRECIATION>                                 340,214
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,266,248
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,453,783
<BONDS>                                        111,149
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           737
<OTHER-SE>                                  (1,444,993)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,266,248
<SALES>                                        537,206
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               537,206
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  542,926
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              53,111
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (58,831)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (58,041)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (58,041)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.79)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.79)


</TABLE>
John D. SOUTER, Jr, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3033

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed December 26, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

SRI INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant

______________________

2017-2223

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

District of Delaware in No. 1:13-cv-01534-SLR-SRF, Judge 

Sue L. Robinson.

______________________

ON PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING

______________________

Before LOURIE, O’MALLEY, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

O R D E R

Appellant Cisco Systems, Inc., filed a combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc on May 10, 

2019. A response to the petition was invited by the court 

and filed by Appellee SRI International, Inc.
2 SRI INT’L, INC. v. CISCO SYS., INC.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1) The petition for panel rehearing is granted in part 

and denied in part.

2) The previous precedential opinion in this appeal, issued March 20, 2019, is withdrawn and replaced 

with the modified precedential opinion accompanying this order. The modifications appear in section V

of the opinion, along with corresponding changes to 

the introduction and conclusion.

 FOR THE COURT

 July 12, 2019 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

 Date Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          10,351
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  261,461
<ALLOWANCES>                                    33,894
<INVENTORY>                                     16,743
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               289,575
<PP&E>                                         495,817
<DEPRECIATION>                                 198,804
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 866,260
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          142,469
<BONDS>                                        311,233
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           203
<OTHER-SE>                                     352,606
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   866,260
<SALES>                                        565,520
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               565,520
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  517,994
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,436
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 39,090
<INCOME-TAX>                                    16,369
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             22,539
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.14
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Lincare Holdings Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, John P. Byrnes, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|               |  |     |  |                                       
|-------------- |  | --- |  | --------------------------------------
|               |  | By: |  | /S/ JOHN P. BYRNES                    
|               |  |     |  | John P. Byrnes Chief Executive Officer
|               |  |    
|August 5, 2008 |  |     |  |