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

12553 

Federal Register 

Vol. 87, No. 43 

Friday, March 4, 2022 

Title 3— 

The President 

Notice of March 3, 2022 

Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to 

Zimbabwe 

On March 6, 2003, by Executive Order 13288, the President declared a 

national emergency and blocked the property of certain persons, pursuant 

to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706), 

to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the foreign policy 

of the United States constituted by the actions and policies of certain members of the Government of Zimbabwe and other persons to undermine 

Zimbabwe’s democratic processes or institutions. These actions and policies 

had contributed to the deliberate breakdown in the rule of law in Zimbabwe, 

to politically motivated violence and intimidation in that country, and to 

political and economic instability in the southern African region. 

On November 22, 2005, the President issued Executive Order 13391 to 

take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in 

Executive Order 13288 by ordering the blocking of the property of additional 

persons undermining democratic processes or institutions in Zimbabwe. 

On July 25, 2008, the President issued Executive Order 13469, which expanded the scope of the national emergency declared in Executive Order 

13288 and authorized the blocking of the property of additional persons 

undermining democratic processes or institutions in Zimbabwe. 

The actions and policies of certain members of the Government of Zimbabwe 

and other persons to undermine Zimbabwe’s democratic processes or institutions continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the foreign 

policy of the United States. For this reason, the national emergency declared 

on March 6, 2003, and the measures adopted on that date, on November 

22, 2005, and on July 25, 2008, to deal with that emergency, must continue 

in effect beyond March 6, 2022. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) 

of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 

1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13288. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with FR_PREZDOC3
12554 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 43 / Friday, March 4, 2022 / Presidential Documents 

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to 

the Congress. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

March 3, 2022. 

[FR Doc. 2022–04879 

Filed 3–3–22; 11:15 am] 

Billing code 3395–F2–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with FR_PREZDOC3BIDEN.EPS</GPH>
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 612 

To preserve and protect the free choice of individual employees to form, 

join, or assist labor organizations, or to refrain from such activities. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 28, 2015 

Mr. KING of Iowa (for himself, Mr. BARR, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BISHOP of 

Utah, Mr. BLUM, Mr. BRAT, Mr. BROOKS of Alabama, Mr. BUCK, Mr. 

CLAWSON of Florida, Mr. COLLINS of Georgia, Mrs. COMSTOCK, Mr. 

CONAWAY, Mr. CRAWFORD, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. 

DESJARLAIS, Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina, Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee, Mr. FINCHER, Mr. FLEISCHMANN, Ms. FOXX, Mr. BARTON, Mr. 

FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GIBBS, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. 

GOSAR, Mr. GRAVES of Georgia, Mr. GRIFFITH, Mr. HARPER, Mrs. 

HARTZLER, Mr. HUDSON, Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan, Mr. HUELSKAMP, 

Ms. JENKINS of Kansas, Mr. JOLLY, Mr. JORDAN, Mr. LAMALFA, Mr. 

LAMBORN, Mr. LONG, Mr. LOUDERMILK, Mrs. LUMMIS, Mr. MARCHANT, 

Mr. MASSIE, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. MEADOWS, Mr. 

MOOLENAAR, Mr. MULLIN, Mr. MULVANEY, Mr. NUNNELEE, Mr. 

NUGENT, Mr. PALMER, Mr. PALAZZO, Mr. PERRY, Mr. PEARCE, Mr. 

PITTENGER, Mr. PITTS, Mr. POMPEO, Mr. RATCLIFFE, Mrs. ROBY, Mr. 

ROONEY of Florida, Mr. SALMON, Mr. SCHWEIKERT, Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT

of Georgia, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SMITH of Nebraska, Mr. TIPTON, Mr. 

WEBER of Texas, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. WILLIAMS, Mr. WILSON of 

South Carolina, Mr. WOMACK, Mr. YOHO, Mrs. BLACK, and Mr. 

BUCSHON) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To preserve and protect the free choice of individual employees to form, join, or assist labor organizations, or to 

refrain from such activities. 


ebenthall on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 612 IH

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘National Right-to5 Work Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE NATIONAL LABOR RELA7 TIONS ACT. 

8 (a) Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act 

9 (the ‘‘Act’’) (29 U.S.C. 157) is amended by striking ‘‘ex10 cept to’’ and all that follows through ‘‘authorized in sec11 tion 8(a)(3)’’. 

12 (b) Section 8(a) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 158(a)) is 

13 amended by striking ‘‘: Provided, That’’ and all that fol14 lows through ‘‘retaining membership’’ in paragraph (3). 

15 (c) Section 8(b) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 158(b)) is 

16 amended by striking ‘‘or to discriminate’’ and all that fol17 lows through ‘‘retaining membership’’ in paragraph (2) 

18 and by striking ‘‘covered by an agreement authorized 

19 under subsection (a)(3) of this section’’ in paragraph (5). 

20 (d) Section 8(f) of the Act (29 U.S.C. 158(f)) is 

21 amended by striking clause (2) and by redesignating 

22 clauses (3) and (4) as (2) and (3), respectively. 


ebenthall on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 612 IH

1 SEC. 3. AMENDMENT TO THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT. 

2 Section 2 of the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 152) 

3 is amended by striking paragraph Eleventh. 

Æ 


ebenthall on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Richard A. POPE, Petitioner v. DEPARTMENT OF the NAVY, Respondent

2016-2106

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

June 19, 2017

*628Jack Bradley Jarrett, III, Alan Léscht and Associates, PC, Washington, DC, argued for petitioner.

Alexis J. Echols, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent. Also represented by Joyce R. Branda, Robert E. Kirschman, Jr., Elizabeth M. Hospord.

(Dyk, Reyna, and Taranto, Circuit Judges).

JUDGMENT

Per Curiam '

This Cause having been heard and considered, it is Ordered and Adjudged:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 857 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 857

    To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide waiver 
 authority for the requirement to provide a written justification for 
 the exact grounds for the denial of a visa, except in cases of intent 
                             to immigrate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                 May 25 (legislative day, May 15), 1995

   Ms. Snowe introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide waiver 
 authority for the requirement to provide a written justification for 
 the exact grounds for the denial of a visa, except in cases of intent 
                             to immigrate.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Law Enforcement and Intelligence 
Sources Protection Act of 1995''.

SEC. 2. WAIVER AUTHORITY CONCERNING NOTICE OF DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR 
              VISAS.

    Section 212(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1182(b)) is amended--
            (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as 
        subparagraphs (A) and (B);
            (2) by striking ``If'' and inserting ``(1) Subject to 
        paragraph (2), if'; and
            (3) by inserting at the end the following paragraph:
    ``(2) With respect to applications for visas, the Secretary of 
State may waive the application of paragraph (1) in the case of a 
particular alien or any class or classes of excludable aliens, except 
in cases of intent to immigrate.''.
                                 <all>
```
----- Forwarded by Brian Shrager/RTP/USEPA/US on 02/18/2011 03:07 PM

-----

From: Brian Shrager/RTP/USEPA/US

To: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov>

Cc: Jim Eddinger/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Date: 02/09/2011 10:00 AM

Subject: Fw: Testing and Monitoring Cost Details by Subcategory

Cortney,

Per your request, attached are the testing and monitoring costs broken

out by subcategory and control (monitoring only). The control costs are

broken out in Appendix A-1 to the Impacts Memo (which I've provided

again since it is not a large file).

Thanks!

Brian

(See attached file: TestingCostDetails for OMB 020711.xlsx)(See attached

file: Impacts Appendix A-1 to A-3.xlsx)
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002**

 

In connection withthe Annual Report on Form 10-K of Barrington Broadcasting Group LLC andBarrington Broadcasting Capital Corporation (together, the “Company”) forthe year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Warren Spector, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.                                       The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 
|   |                      |
|--------|---------------------------|
|   | /s/ Warren Spector        |   |
|   | Warren Spector            |
|   | *Chief Financial Officer* |
|   |                      |
|   | March 27, 2008       |

 

 

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael S. Leto, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by
this report on Form 10-K of the Corporate Backed Callable Trust Certificates, J.C. Penney Debenture-Backed Series 2006-1 Trust (the Exchange Act periodic reports);

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit
to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;

4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement
required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing, or similar, agreement in all material respects; and

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act
Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance
described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee.

Date: March 28, 2014



|                                                              |  |                                                     
|------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------
|By:                                                           |  | /s/ Michael S. Leto                                 
|Name:                                                         |  | Michael S. Leto                                     
|Title:                                                        |  | Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President
|(Senior Officer in charge of securitization of the Depositor)
Exhibit 32





Section 1350 Certifications




Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of EastBridge Investment Group Corporation, an Arizona corporation (the Company), hereby certify that:




To my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated:  April 13, 2011


By:
/s/ Keith WongKeith WongChief Executive Officer





Dated:  April 13, 2011


By:
/s/ Norm KleinNorm KleinPrincipal Financial and Accounting Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-2105

WALTER E. CHILDRESS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY, formerly known as Appalachian Power Company; STEPHEN LEWIS JAMISON; FAY AMOS; AETNA INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Lynchburg. Norman K. Moon, District Judge. (CA-99-34-6) Submitted: January 31, 2000 Decided: February 25, 2000 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Walter E. Childress, Appellant Pro Se. William Beverly Poff, FrankKenneth Friedman, Thomas Meredith Winn, III, WOODS, ROGERS & HAZLEGROVE, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Walter E. Childress appeals the district court’s order dismissing his claims against the Defendants on the basis of res judicata and moves to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Childress v. American Electric Power Co. , No. CA-99-34- 6 (W.D. Va. July 14, 1999). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
**Annual
      Statement of Compliance**


VIA:
      EMAIL




Merrill
      Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc.


250
      Vesey
      Street


4
      World
      Financial Center, 10th Floor


New
      York,
      New York10080




Litton
      Loan Servicing LP


4828
      Loop
      Central Drive


Houston,
      Texas77081






Re: 
      Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the "Agreement"), dated as of October 1, 2006,
      among Merrill   Lynch  Mortgage Investors, Inc., as depositor,
      Litton Loan Servicing LP, as servicer, and LaSalle Bank National Association,
      as  trustee (the “Trustee”), relating to Ownit Mortgage Loan Trust,
      Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2006-7.




I,
      Barbara L. Marik, a First Vice President of LaSalle Bank National Association,
      as Trustee hereby certify that:




(1) A review of the activities of the Trustee during the preceding calendar
      year
      and of the performance of the Trustee under the Agreement has been made under
      my
      supervision; and




(2) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Trustee has fulfilled
      all its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout
      such
      year or a portion thereof.






Date: February
      1, 2007




LaSalle
      Bank National Association, as Trustee




/s/
      Barbara L Marik


Barbara
      L. Marik


First
      Vice President
#### IN RE Everton Aloysius STERLING, Debtor. Everton Aloysius Sterling, Debtor-Appellant, v. David Carlebach, Appellee.

No. 16-1120-bk

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

May 19, 2017

FOR APPELLANT: Everton Aoysius Sterling, pro se, Bronx, New York.

FOR APPELLEE: No appearance.

PRESENT: REENA RAGGI, DENNY CHIN, SUSAN L. CARNEY, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

Everton Aoysius Sterling, *pro se,*appeals from the dismissal of his bankruptcy appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On plenary review of a decision of a district court functioning as an intermediate appellate court in a bankruptcy case, we assess legal conclusions, including a determination of subject matter jurisdiction, *de novo,*while, we consider factual findings only for clear error. *See In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc.,*761 F.3d 303, 308 (2d Cir. 2014); *Bechtel v. Competitive Techs., Inc.,*448 F.3d 469, 471 (2d Cir. 2006). In so doing, we assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts and procedural history of the case, which we reference only as necessary to explain our decision to affirm.

An appeal to the district court from an order of the bankruptcy court must be made within 14 days. *See*Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(a)(1); *see also*28 U.S.C. § 158(c)(2) (providing that bankruptcy appeal must be filed within time prescribed by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002). The time limitations in Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002(a) are jurisdictional, regardless of a party’s *pro se*status. *See In re Siemon,*421 F.3d 167, 169 (2d Cir. 2005). Thus, “in the absence of a timely notice of appeal in the district court, [a] district court is without jurisdiction to consider the appeal, regardless of whether the appellant can demonstrate ‘excusable neglect.’ ” *Id.*

We conclude that the district court properly dismissed Sterling’s bankruptcy appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because his notice of appeal was filed on January 13, 2016 — more than 14 days after the entry of the bankruptcy court’s December 22, 2015 order. Sterling’s argument that he was away when the bankruptcy court entered its decision and, therefore, actually had fewer than 14 days to file his appeal is foreclosed by *In re Siemon,*421 F.3d at 169. Moreover, Ster*748ling does not meet any of the exceptions to the 14-day deadline enumerated in Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8002.1

We have considered Sterling’s remaining arguments and conclude that they are without merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the March 30, 2016 order of the district court.

1

. Insofar as Sterling did, in fact, file a Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7052 motion, that motion did not toll the time limit for appeal because it was itself untimely, having been filed 16 days after the entry of the bankruptcy court's order. *See*Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7052 (mandating 14-day deadline for filing motion under rule).
Re: EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0923 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

Nufarm is a leading manufacturer and marketer of generic pesticides for the agricultural, forestry, 

turf, aquatic, industrial vegetation and specialty pest management markets with over 500 EPA 

registered pesticide products. As such, we have a significant interest in the consolidated ICR 

entitled “Pesticide Data Call-In Program”, EPA ICR No. 2288.01 and OMB Control No. 2070-new. 

Our principal comment is that the labor time and burden hours assume relatively few data call-in 

responses per registrant. As we read the ICR, the number varies from context to context, but 

always seems to be less than 20. As a technical registrant for numerous active ingredients and a 

firm that generates or participates in generating many high burden studies, we believe that the 

number of responses is understated. This is particularly true because we will be affected by 

multiple data call-ins that are simultaneous or overlapping. The situation is exacerbated by the 

greater number of registrants per active ingredient that complicate the organization of joint testing 

programs. 

Similarly, due to a multitude of end-use product registrations, Nufarm also submits large volumes 

of studies that are termed “low burden.” In our experience with Reregistration data call-ins, the 

burden is not low when we have 25, 75 or more than 150 registrations containing a particular 

active ingredient in conjunction with multiple simultaneous or overlapping data call-ins. 

To compensate for this understated burden, we propose that registrants having large numbers of 

registrations be entitled to longer data call-in response timeframes. Specifically, we propose that 

1 extra month be granted for each group of 25 registrations held by the same company (or 

affiliated companies) and subject to the same data call-in. In other words, if a company has 25-49 

registrations 1 extra month would be added, if 50-74 registrations 2 extra months, if 75-99 

registrations 3 extra months and so forth. This proposal would bring more realistic scale to the 

burden hour projections. 

Thank you for your consideration of these comments. 

William M. Mahlburg 

Director, Government Affairs 

Nufarm Americas, Inc. 

150 Harvester Drive, Suite 200 

Burr Ridge IL 60527
Exhibit 99.1
                                                                    ------------

          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 of Capital Preferred Yield Fund-IV, L.P.
(the "Partnership") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30,
2004, as filed with the Security and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, John F. Olmstead, President and Director of CAI Equipment Leasing
V Corp., the General Partner of the Partnership, certify, 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.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Partnership.


By:      /s/ John F. Olmstead                          Dated:  November 12, 2004
         --------------------
         John F. Olmstead
Title:   President and Director