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

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4200 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 3, 2014 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 

Urban Affairs 

AN ACT 

To amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to prevent 

duplicative regulation of advisers of small business investment companies. 

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


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 4200 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘SBIC Advisers Relief 

3 Act of 2014’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ADVISERS OF SBICS AND VENTURE CAPITAL FUNDS. 

5 Section 203(l) of the Investment Advisers Act of 

6 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b–3(l)) is amended— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘No investment adviser’’ and in8 serting the following: 

9 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—No investment adviser’’; 

10 and 

11 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

12 ‘‘(2) ADVISERS OF SBICS.—For purposes of this 

13 subsection, a venture capital fund includes an entity 

14 described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of sub15 section (b)(7) (other than an entity that has elected 

16 to be regulated or is regulated as a business develop17 ment company pursuant to section 54 of the Invest18 ment Company Act of 1940).’’. 

19 SEC. 3. ADVISERS OF SBICS AND PRIVATE FUNDS. 

20 Section 203(m) of the Investment Advisers Act of 

21 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b–3(m)) is amended by adding at the 

22 end the following: 

23 ‘‘(3) ADVISERS OF SBICS.—For purposes of this 

24 subsection, the assets under management of a pri25 vate fund that is an entity described in subpara26 graph (A), (B), or (C) of subsection (b)(7) (other 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 4200 RFS 

1 than an entity that has elected to be regulated or is 

2 regulated as a business development company pursu3 ant to section 54 of the Investment Company Act of 

4 1940) shall be excluded from the limit set forth in 

5 paragraph (1).’’. 

6 SEC. 4. RELATIONSHIP TO STATE LAW. 

7 Section 203A(b)(1) of the Investment Advisers Act 

8 of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b–3a(b)(1)) is amended— 

9 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘or’’ at 

10 the end; 

11 (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period 

12 at the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

13 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

14 ‘‘(C) that is not registered under section 

15 203 because that person is exempt from reg16 istration as provided in subsection (b)(7) of 

17 such section, or is a supervised person of such 

18 person.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 2, 

2014. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
STATE of North Carolina v. Samuel BAKER, Defendant.

No. COA16-645

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: March 7, 2017

NO ERROR.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 178 (Thursday, September 15, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 54567]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18317]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service


Endangered and Threatened Species Permit Applications

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of applications.

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

SUMMARY: The following applicants have applied for permits to conduct 
certain activities with endangered species. This notice is provided 
pursuant to section 10(c) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531, et seq.).

DATES: Written data or comments must be received on or before October 
17, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Send written data or comments to the Regional Director, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, 1 Federal Drive, Fort 
Snelling, Minnesota 55111-4056.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Peter Fasbender, (612) 713-5343.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Permit Number: TE087770-1

Applicant: Kimberly Livengood.

    The applicant requests a permit amendment to take the Indiana bat 
(Myotis sodalis) and gray bat (M. grisescens) in Illinois. The 
scientific research is aimed at enhancement of survival of the species 
in the wild.

Permit Number: TE106545-1

Applicant: Melody Meyers-Kinzie.

    The applicant requests a permit amendment to take clubshell 
(Pluerobema clava), rough pigtoe (P. plenum), fanshell (Cyprogenia 
stegaria), and northern riffleshell (Epioblasma torulosa rangiana) 
throughout Kentucky. The scientific research is aimed at enhancement of 
survival of the species in the wild.

Permit Number: TE108952

Applicant: Debra Scott.

    The applicant requests a permit amendment to take the Indiana bat 
(Myotis sodalist) in Illinois. The scientific research is aimed at 
enhancement of survival of the species in the wild.

Permit Number: TE839763-6

Applicant: John Whitaker, Indiana State University.

    The applicant requests a permit amendment to take the Indiana bat 
(Myotis sodalist) throughout the range of the species. The scientific 
research is aimed at enhancement of survival of the species in the 
wild.

Permit Number: TE056081-4

Applicant: EnviroScience, Inc., Stow, Ohio.

    The applicant requests a permit amendment to take endangered 
mussels in Florida. The scientific research is aimed at enhancement of 
survival of the species in the wild.

Permit Number: TE088720-1

Applicant: G. Tom Watters, Columbus, Ohio.

    The applicant requests a permit to take endangered mussels in 
Florida and hold in Ohio for host identification and propagation 
efforts. The scientific research is aimed at enhancement of survival of 
the species in the wild.

    Dated: August 10, 2005.
Wendi Weber,
Assistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, Region 3, Fort 
Snelling, Minnesota.
[FR Doc. 05-18317 Filed 9-14-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
In the Matter of: A.M.

No. COA16-331

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: November 1, 2016

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 413 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 413

To eliminate the 2-year delay in including oral-only ESRD-related drugs 
  in the Medicare ESRD prospective payment system, as provided under 
     section 632(b)(1) of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 23, 2013

Mr. Welch (for himself, Mr. Hanna, Mr. Cooper, and Mr. Braley of Iowa) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
   Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and 
 Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 
   each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To eliminate the 2-year delay in including oral-only ESRD-related drugs 
  in the Medicare ESRD prospective payment system, as provided under 
     section 632(b)(1) of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012.

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

SECTION 1. ELIMINATING THE 2-YEAR DELAY IN IMPLEMENTATION OF ORAL-ONLY 
              ESRD-RELATED DRUGS IN THE MEDICARE ESRD PROSPECTIVE 
              PAYMENT SYSTEM.

    Section 632(b) of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (Public 
Law 112-240) is amended by striking all that precedes ``With respect to 
the implementation'' and inserting the following::
    ``(b) Monitoring of Implementation of Oral-Only ESRD-Related Drugs 
in the ESRD Prospective Payment System.--With respect to the 
implementation''.
                                 <all>
```
SOMA TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. Photios DALAMAGAS; Denova Medical, Inc. ; and Hiren Desai

No. 307PA17

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 1, 2017

Mr. Sam McGee, Attorney at Law, For Desai, Hiren.

Mr. Daniel F.E. Smith, Attorney at Law, For Soma Technology, Inc.

Mr. Paul J. Stevens, Attorney at Law, For Dalamagas, Photios, et al.

Mr. Robert J. King, III, Attorney at Law, For Soma Technology, Inc.

Mr. Jonathan M. Shapiro, Attorney at Law, For Soma Technology, Inc.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant (Hiren Desai) on the 13th of September 2017 in this matter for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 prior to a determination by the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 1st of November 2017."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).

Defendant (Hiren Desai) shall forthwith submit an appeal bond to this Court, as provided by Appellate Rule 17(b). The bond may be in cash or by a written undertaking with good and sufficient surety in the sum of $250.00.
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4012 

AN ACT 

To prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing, finalizing, or disseminating regulations or assessments based upon science that is not transparent or 

reproducible. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 4012 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Secret Science Reform 

3 Act of 2014’’. 

4 SEC. 2. DATA TRANSPARENCY. 

5 Section 6(b) of the Environmental Research, Devel6 opment, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 

7 (42 U.S.C. 4363 note) is amended to read as follows: 

8 ‘‘(b)(1) The Administrator shall not propose, finalize, 

9 or disseminate a covered action unless all scientific and 

10 technical information relied on to support such covered ac11 tion is— 

12 ‘‘(A) specifically identified; and 

13 ‘‘(B) publicly available online in a manner that 

14 is sufficient for independent analysis and substantial 

15 reproduction of research results. 

16 ‘‘(2) Nothing in the subsection shall be construed as 

17 requiring the public dissemination of information the dis18 closure of which is prohibited by law. 

19 ‘‘(3) In this subsection— 

20 ‘‘(A) the term ‘covered action’ means a risk, ex21 posure, or hazard assessment, criteria document, 

22 standard, limitation, regulation, regulatory impact 

23 analysis, or guidance; and 

24 ‘‘(B) the term ‘scientific and technical informa25 tion’ includes— 
3 

•HR 4012 EH

1 ‘‘(i) materials, data, and associated proto2 cols necessary to understand, assess, and ex3 tend conclusions; 

4 ‘‘(ii) computer codes and models involved 

5 in the creation and analysis of such informa6 tion; 

7 ‘‘(iii) recorded factual materials; and 

8 ‘‘(iv) detailed descriptions of how to access 

9 and use such information.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives November 19, 

2014. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4012 

AN ACT 

To prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency 

not transparent or reproducible. lations or assessments based upon science that is from proposing, finalizing, or disseminating regu-
# C_2008236EN.01000202.xml

| 13.9.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 236/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.9.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 236/2

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 25 July 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo de Madrid — Spain) — Ecologistas en Acción-CODA v Ayuntamiento de Madrid

(Case C-142/07) (1)

1

(Directives 85/337/EEC and 97/11/EC - Assessment of the effects of projects on the environment - Refurbishment and improvement works on urban roads - Whether subject to assessment)

(2008/C 236/03)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo de Madrid

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ecologistas en Acción-CODA

Applicant:

Defendant: Ayuntamiento de Madrid

Defendant:

Re:

REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling — Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo de Madrid — Interpretation of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (OJ 1985 L 175, p. 40) — Urban road projects in densely populated areas or concerning landscapes of historical, cultural or archaeological significance — Whether subject to an assessment procedure having regard to their nature, size and effect — Applicability of the criteria in the judgment of the Court in Case C-332/04 Commission v Spain

Commission

Spain

Operative part of the judgment

Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997, must be interpreted as meaning that it provides for environmental impact assessment of refurbishment and improvement projects for urban roads, either where they are projects covered by point 7(b) or (c) of Annex I to the directive, or where they are projects covered by point 10(e) of Annex II or the first indent of point 13 thereof, which are likely, by virtue of their nature, size or location and, if appropriate, having regard to their interaction with other projects, to have significant effects on the environment.

---

(1)  OJ C 129, 9.6.2007.

1

---
State of North Carolina v. Larry James Waters

No. 176P16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 18, 2016

John F. Carella, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Waters, Larry James.

Josephine N. Tetteh, Assistant Attorney General, Mike Miller, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 10th of May 2016 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

*518"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 18th of August 2016."
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6744

RODNEY STEPHON HAIRSTON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

J. HAYNES, Superintendent,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Jr.,

District Judge. (1:07-cv-00403-WO-PTS)

Submitted: September 26, 2008 Decided: October 17, 2008

Before MOTZ, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rodney Stephon Hairston, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge,

III, Assistant Attorney General, Raleigh, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Rodney Stephon Hairston seeks to appeal the district

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge

and dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition.

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hairston has

not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Hairston’s

motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
STATE of North Carolina v. Harry Sharod JAMES

No. 514PA11-2

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 16, 2017.

David W. Andrews, Assistant Appellate Defender, for James, Harry Sharod.

Sandra Wallace-Smith, Special Deputy Attorney General, R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

*7***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the conditional petition filed on the 13th of June 2016 by State of NC in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th of March 2017."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4208 

To ensure stability in FHA maximum mortgage amount limitations for areas 

experiencing decreases in median home prices. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 12, 2014 

Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California (for himself, Mr. SHERMAN, Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. MCNERNEY, and Mr. 

KING of New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To ensure stability in FHA maximum mortgage amount limitations for areas experiencing decreases in median home 

prices. 

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 ‘‘Stabilizing FHA Loan 

5 Limit Calculations Act of 2014’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FHA MAXIMUM MORTGAGE AMOUNT LIMITATIONS. 

7 Paragraph (2) of section 203(b) of the National 

8 Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1709(b)(2)) is amended— 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4208 IH

1 (1) in subparagraph (A)(i), by inserting before 

2 ‘‘; or’’ the following: ‘‘; except that with respect to 

3 2014 and each year thereafter, the median house 

4 price for any size residence for an area shall, for 

5 purposes of this clause, be considered to be equal to 

6 the greatest median house price for such size resi7 dence for such area used by the Secretary for pur8 poses of determining the dollar amount limitation on 

9 the principal obligation for purposes of this section 

10 for 2013 (pursuant to section 238 of Public Law 

11 112–55; 125 Stat. 702), or for any year thereafter 

12 before the assignment of the Federal Housing Ad13 ministration case number for the mortgage in14 volved’’; and 

15 (2) by adding at the end the following undesig16 nated paragraph: 

17 ‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if 

18 the Secretary determines, for any geographic area 

19 that is smaller than an area for which dollar amount 

20 limitations on the principal obligation of a mortgage 

21 are determined under this paragraph, that a higher 

22 such maximum dollar amount limitation is war23 ranted for any particular size or sizes of residences 

24 in such sub-area by higher median home prices in 

25 such sub-area, the Secretary may increase the maxVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:26 Mar 15, 2014 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H4208.IH H4208

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4208 IH

1 imum dollar amount limitation for such size or sizes 

2 of residences for such sub-area that is otherwise in 

3 effect (including pursuant to the first sentence of 

4 this paragraph), but in no case to an amount that 

5 exceeds the amount specified in subparagraph (A)(ii) 

6 of this paragraph.’’. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32

                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Cameron International, Inc. on Form
10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Stephen Samuels, Chief Executive and
Accounting Officer of Cameron International, 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
          of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

     2.   The information contained in the Report on Form 10-QSB fairly
          presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
          results of operations of the registrant.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
10th day of November, 2004.


/s/ Stephen Samuels
-----------------------------
Stephen Samuels
President, Treasurer & Director
(Principal Executive and Accounting Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 180 (Monday, September 19, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54947-54948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18601]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), 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: Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation 
Research Committee Allergy, Immunology and Transplantation Research 
Committee
    Date: October 17, 2005.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Double Tree Rockville, 1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 
20852.
    Contact Person: Quirijn Vos, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural 
Activities, NIAID/NIH/DHHS, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC, 7616, 
Bethesda, MD 20892-7616, (301) 451-2666, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6415120b17240a0d050d004a0a0d0c4a030b12"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ed9c9b829ead83848c8489c3838485c38a829b">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)


[[Page 54948]]


    Dated: September 12, 2005.
Anthony M. Coelho, Jr.,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-18601 Filed 9-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>