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 Homeland Security

###### U.S. Customs and Border Protection

# AGENCY:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security.

# ACTION:

Notice of accreditation and approval of Chem Gas International LLC, as a commercial gauger and laboratory.

# SUMMARY:

                        Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, Chem Gas International LLC, 12002 Highway 146, Dickinson, TX 77539, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products and organic chemicals for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to                         *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov.*                         Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.                         *http://cbp.gov/​xp/​cgov/​import/​operations_​support/​labs_​scientific_​svcs/​commercial_​gaugers/​*.                    

# DATES:

The accreditation and approval of Chem Gas International LLC, as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on August 15, 2008. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for August 2011.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Randall Breaux, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060.

      ( print page 51835)    
Dated: August 25, 2008.

Ira S. Reese,

Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services. 

[FR Doc. E8-20678 Filed 9-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Tuccillo, Appellant.

Judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Fred W. Eggert, J.), rendered December 3, 1987, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of sodomy in the first degree and sentencing defendant to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of from *3 Vs*to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, “among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence *(People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302, 305).

Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms” *(People v Felman,*141 AD2d 889, 890, *lv denied*72 NY2d 918). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Rosenberger, Asch and Rubin, JJ.
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency 

          - [FEMA-1785-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. 

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Florida (FEMA-1785-DR), dated August 24, 2008, and related determinations. 

# DATES:

*Effective Date:*                         August 26, 2008.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Miller, Disaster Assistance Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3886. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Florida is hereby amended to include the Individual Assistance program for the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of August 24, 2008. 

Brevard County for Individual Assistance (already designated for Public Assistance). 

                        (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance                               ( print page 52404)                            (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.)                    

R. David Paulison, 

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

[FR Doc. E8-20827 Filed 9-8-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
#### In the Matter of Ronald Riggins, Petitioner, v Walter R. Kelly, as Superintendent of Attica Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.

Determination unanimously confirmed and petition dismissed. Memorandum: The determination that petitioner is guilty of violating inmate rules 106.10 (refusal to obey a direct order) and 100.11 (assault) is supported by substantial evidence. The Hearing Officer relied on the written misbehavior report in which the correction officer stated that petitioner failed to step into line and, "[ijnstead, he lowered his left shoulder and drove into me.” The Hearing Officer was entitled to credit the charging officer’s version and to reject that of petitioner *(see, People ex rel. Vega v Smith,*66 *913NY2d 130). (Article 78 proceeding transferred by order of Supreme Court, Wyoming County, Dadd, J.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Doerr, Boomer, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
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 Defense

###### Department of the Navy

# AGENCY:

Department of the Navy, DoD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the provisions of The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), notice is hereby given that the following meeting of the Board of Advisors to the President, Naval Postgraduate School will be held. This meeting will be open to the public.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 21, 2008, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and on Wednesday, October 22, 2008, from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. Eastern Time Zone.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Office of Naval Research, 875 N. Randolph Street, Suite 1435, Arlington, VA 22203.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Jaye Panza, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA, 93943-5001, telephone: 831-656-2514.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The purpose of the meeting is to elicit the advice of the Board on the Naval Service's Postgraduate Education Program and the collaborative exchange and partnership between NPS and the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT). The board examines the effectiveness with which the NPS is accomplishing its mission. To this end, the board will inquire into the curricula; instruction; physical equipment; administration; state of morale of the student body, faculty, and staff; fiscal affairs; and any other matters relating to the operation of the NPS as the board considers pertinent. Individuals without a DoD government/CAC card require an escort at the meeting location.

For access, information, or to send written comments regarding the NPS BOA contact Ms. Jaye Panza, Naval Postgraduate School, 1 University Circle, Monterey, CA 93943-5001 or by fax: 831-656-3145 by October 10, 2008.

Dated: August 28, 2008.

T. M. Cruz,

Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. E8-20591 Filed 9-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

MICHAEL YABLONSKI,

Respondent

v.

KEEVICAN WEISS BAUERLE & HIRSCH 

LLC,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 5 WAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 18th day of June, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
DENY and Opinion Filed April 17, 2023 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-23-00332-CV 

IN RE REDBIRD TRAILS APARTMENTS, BRIDGEWAY CAPITAL, LLC 

AND NCM MANAGEMENT, LTD., Relators 

Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 1 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-17-00945-A 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Partida-Kipness, Carlyle, and Garcia 

Opinion by Justice Partida-Kipness 

Before the Court are relators’ April 10, 2023 petition for writ of mandamus 

and emergency motion for temporary stay of trial. In their petition, relators challenge 

the trial court’s order denying their motion for discovery of documents considered 

confidential under the Texas Family Code. They complain that the trial court abused 

its discretion by determining after an in camera inspection that none of the requested 

documents were relevant. 

Relators’ burden is to provide this Court with a sufficient record for 

mandamus review. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7. This burden requires them “to request 

that any documents submitted to the trial court for in camera inspection be carried 
 –2– 

forward under seal so that the appellate court can evaluate this information.” In re 

Barnes, 655 S.W.3d 658, 668 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2022, orig. proceeding); see also 

Lesher v. Coyel, 435 S.W.3d 423, 431–32 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2014, pet. denied) 

(noting that if documents have been submitted for in camera inspection, complaining 

party must request that the exhibits be carried forward under seal so that appellate 

court can evaluate them). 

Here, the mandamus record does not include the records inspected by the trial 

court in camera, and nothing before us reflects that relators have asked the trial court 

to carry the documents forward to this Court under seal. We are unable to assess the 

merits of the petition without them. Accordingly, relators have failed to meet their 

burden to provide the Court with a sufficient record, and we deny the petition. 

Having denied the petition, we also deny the emergency motion as moot. 

230332F.P05 

/Robbie Partida-Kipness/

ROBBIE PARTIDA-KIPNESS 

JUSTICE
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6948 

To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services, acting through 

the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, to promulgate rules to update 

certain regulations relating to human cells, tissues, and cellular and 

tissue-based products, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 7, 2022 

Mr. CRENSHAW (for himself and Mr. BURGESS) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 

acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 

to promulgate rules to update certain regulations relating 

to human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based 

products, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. UPDATING CERTAIN REGULATIONS RELATING 

4 TO HUMAN CELLS, TISSUES, AND CELLULAR 

5 AND TISSUE-BASED PRODUCTS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Health and 

7 Human Services, acting through the Commissioner of 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6948 IH

1 Food and Drugs, shall update the regulations in part 1271 

2 of title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on 

3 the date of the enactment of this Act), including such revi4 sions as may be necessary to update the definition of the 

5 term ‘‘minimal manipulation’’ specified in section 1271.3 

6 of title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on 

7 such date of enactment). 

8 (b) TIMELINE.—The Secretary shall— 

9 (1) issue proposed regulations to carry out the 

10 updates required under subsection (a) not later than 

11 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act; 

12 and 

13 (2) finalize such proposed regulations not later 

14 than 1 year after the date on which such proposed 

15 regulations are issued. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 33 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 33

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
  respecting the right to a clean, safe, and sustainable environment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 6, 2001

  Mr. Jackson of Illinois introduced the following joint resolution; 
          which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
  respecting the right to a clean, safe, and sustainable environment.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. All citizens of the United States shall have a right 
to a clean, safe, and sustainable environment, which right shall not be 
denied or abridged by the United States or any State.
    ``Section 2. The Congress shall have power to implement this 
article by appropriate legislation.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Bruce Castro, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we conclude that defendant’s conviction of assault in the second degree *(see,*Penal Law § 120.05 [4]) is supported by legally sufficient evidence *(see, People v Bleakley,*69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the *880weight of the evidence *(see, People v Bleakley, supra,*at 495). Finally, defendant’s sentence was not harsh and excessive. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Connell, J.— assault, second degree.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Law-ton, Davis and Lowery, JJ.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

JULIAN BODNARI, § § No. 163, 2016 Defendant Below, § Appellant, § Court Below—Superior Court § of the State of Delaware v. § § Cr. ID No. 9909027880 STATE OF DELAWARE, § § Plaintiff Below, § Appellee. § Submitted: May 18, 2016 Decided: July 18, 2016

Before STRINE , Chief Justice; VAUGHN , and SEITZ , Justices.

ORDER

This 18 th day of July 2016, it appears to the Court that: (1) The appellant, Julian Bodnari, filed this appe al from the Superior Court’s order dated March 4, 2016 denying his motio n for resentencing. The State has moved to affirm the Superior Court’s judgment o n the ground that it is manifest on the face of the opening brief that the appeal is without merit. We agree and affirm. (2) Bodnari was sentenced in 2003 for convictions of Trafficking in Cocaine, Possession with Intent to Deliver Cocaine (“PWITD”), Possession of a Firearm during the Commission of a Felony (“PFDCF”) , and other offenses. Bodnari was sentenced to the following consecutive terms of Level V2

incarceration: Trafficking in Cocaine—fifteen years ; PWITD—fifteen years; PFDCF—three years. On direct appeal, this Court af firmed Bodnari’s convictions and sentences, and in 2006, the Court affirmed the Superior Court’s denial of Bodnari’s motion for postconviction relief. 1 (3) Bodnari filed a “motion for resentencing under House Bill 312” asking the Superior Court resentence him to concurr ent terms of imprisonment

under a 2014 amendment of 11 Del. C. § 3901(d). 2 By order dated March 4, 2016, the Superior Court denied the motion on the basis t hat the amendment to section 3901(d) was not intended to have retroactive effect

. (4) The amendment of section 3901(d), which gives judges the discretion to impose concurrent terms of imprisonment for cert ain crimes, does not apply retroactively to sentences imposed before July 9, 2 014, the effective date of the

amendment. 3 Bodnari was sentenced in 2003. The Superior Cour t did not err when denying Bodnari’s motion for resentencing. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to a ffirm is GRANTED. The judgment of the Superior Court is AFF IRMED.

BY THE COURT: /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice

1 Bodnari v. State , 2003 WL 22880372 (Del. Dec. 3, 2003); State v. Bodnari , 2005 WL 589932 (Del. Super. Feb. 28, 2005), aff’d , 2006 WL 155237 (Del. Jan. 18, 2006). 2 See 11 Del. C. § 3901 (governing term of imprisonment) (Supp. 201 6). 3 Fountain v. State , __ A.3d __, 2016 WL 2927750, at *4-5 (Del. May 16 , 2016).
#### HALL v. FEDERAL LAND BANK OF NEW ORLEANS.

No. 5557.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

Dec. 3, 1937.

Harold Moses and Woollen H. Walshe, both of New Orleans, for appellant.

H. W. Ayres, of Jonesboro, for appel-lee.

TALIAFERRO, Judge.

The transcript in this case was lodged here on June 28, 1937. The case, in October, was fixed for argument at the Monroe session in November and submitted on the 3d day of that month. On October 30th, appellee filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, based upon the allegation that appellant, since the perfection of the appeal, had acquiesced in the judgment appealed from by voluntarily executing it. The lower court condemned appellant to pay $75 counsel fee of appellee. The motion specifically alleges that this part of the judgment has been voluntarily paid. In the alternative, mover prays that the case be remanded to the end that testimony be taken in the lower court germane to the issues tendered by the motion.

Appellant admits payment of the $75 award against it, but contends that such payment was made under compulsion to prevent the seizure and sale of its property (the appeal being devolutive), as was at the time threatened. Consideration of the motion is opposed for the alleged reason that it came too late, in that it was only filed on the third day prior to the trial of the case in this court. Greater New Orleans Homestead Association v. Korner, 11 La. App. 59, 123 So. 181, decided by the Orleans Court of Appeal, is cited in support of this contention. That case does uphold appellant’s contention in this respect, but we do not concur in that court’s action on the motion therein passed on.

Motion to dismiss an appeal on the ground of voluntary acquiescence in the judgment is timely if filed prior to decision on appeal. Such motions have not as a basis any informality or- irregularity in bringing up the.appeal, but strike at the very foundation of the right to further prosecute the' appeal and, therefore, the three-day limit *486for filing a motion of this character after the transcript is- lodged or the case fixed for hearing has no application. Jackson v. Parish of Vernon, 150 La. 1057, 91 So. 509; Hochfelder v. Russell, 169 La. 866, 126 So. 219; James v. Fellowes, 23 La.Ann. 37; Evans & Taylor v. Succession of Etheridge, 29 La.Ann. 576.

The motion to dismiss and reply thereto tender issues which this court, possessing only appellate jurisdiction, is without power presently to determine. ' Anent such. an issue, the court in 'the Evans & Taylor Case, supra, pertinently said:

> “But the affidavit of appellee and the counter-affidavit of appellant raise issues which this court can not primarily try, being a court of appellate jurisdiction only. The issue thus raised must he tried.”

See, also, Ryland v. Harve M. Wheeler Lumber Company, 146 La. 787, 84 So. 55.

•For the reasons herein assigned, it is ordered that this casé be remanded to the district court for the purpose of determining the issues raised by the motion to dismiss, and to this end, that court is directed to receive testimony pertinent to such issues and to give such further consideration to the case as the law warrants.