alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Report

2021 Annual FOIA Report

1. Amanda Haas, FOIA Officer, Amanda.Haas@frtib.gov, 202-942-1660

2. Agency’s Reading Room: https://www.frtib.gov/ReadingRoom/index.html 

3. Agency Component Abbreviations

IV. Exemption 3 Statutes

**V.A. FOIA REQUESTS -- RECEIVED, PROCESSED AND PENDING FOIA REQUESTS**

**V.B.(1). DISPOSITION OF FOIA REQUESTS -- ALL PROCESSED REQUESTS**

**V.B.(2). DISPOSITION OF FOIA REQUESTS -- "OTHER" REASONS FOR "FULL DENIALS BASED ON REASONS OTHER THAN EXEMPTIONS"**

**V.B.(3). DISPOSITION OF FOIA REQUESTS -- NUMBER OF TIMES EXEMPTIONS APPLIED**

**VI.A. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS OF INITIAL DETERMINATIONS OF FOIA REQUESTS -- RECEIVED, PROCESSED, AND PENDING ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS**

**VI.B. DISPOSITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS -- ALL PROCESSED APPEALS**

**VI.C.(1). REASONS FOR DENIAL ON APPEAL -- NUMBER OF TIMES EXEMPTIONS APPLIED**

**VI.C.(2). REASONS FOR DENIAL ON APPEAL -- REASONS OTHER THAN EXEMPTIONS**

**VI.C.(3). REASONS FOR DENIAL ON APPEAL -- "OTHER" REASONS**

**VI.C.(4). RESPONSE TIME FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS**

**VI.C.(5). TEN OLDEST PENDING ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS**

**VII.A. FOIA REQUESTS -- RESPONSE TIME FOR ALL PROCESSED PERFECTED REQUESTS**

**VII.B. PROCESSED REQUESTS -- RESPONSE TIME FOR PERFECTED REQUESTS IN WHICH INFORMATION WAS GRANTED**

**VII.C. PROCESSED SIMPLE REQUESTS -- RESPONSE TIME IN DAY INCREMENTS**

**VII.C. PROCESSED COMPLEX REQUESTS -- RESPONSE TIME IN DAY INCREMENTS**

**VII.C. PROCESSED REQUESTS GRANTED EXPEDITED PROCESSING -- RESPONSE TIME IN DAY INCREMENTS**

**VII.D. PENDING REQUESTS -- ALL PENDING PERFECTED REQUESTS**

**VII.E. PENDING REQUESTS -- TEN OLDEST PENDING PERFECTED REQUESTS**

**VIII.A. REQUESTS FOR EXPEDITED PROCESSING**

**VIII.B. Requests for Fee Waiver**

**XII.A. Backlogs of FOIA Requests and Administrative Appeals**

**XII.B. CONSULTATIONS ON FOIA REQUESTS -- RECEIVED, PROCESSED, AND PENDING CONSULTATIONS**

**XII.C. CONSULTATIONS ON FOIA REQUESTS -- TEN OLDEST CONSULTATIONS RECEIVED FROM OTHER AGENCIES AND PENDING AT THE AGENCY**

**XII.D.(1). COMPARISON OF NUMBERS OF REQUESTS FROM PREVIOUS AND CURRENT ANNUAL REPORT -- REQUESTS RECEIVED AND PROCESSED**

**XII.D.(2). COMPARISON OF NUMBERS OF REQUESTS FROM PREVIOUS AND CURRENT ANNUAL REPORT -- BACKLOGGED REQUESTS**

**XII.E.(1). COMPARISON OF NUMBERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS FROM PREVIOUS AND CURRENT ANNUAL REPORT -- APPEALS RECEIVED AND PROCESSED**

**XII.E.(2). COMPARISON OF NUMBERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS FROM PREVIOUS AND CURRENT ANNUAL REPORT -- BACKLOGGED APPEALS**

**
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>         5
<LEGEND>
                  THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
                  FROM  THE   CONSOLIDATED   BALANCE  SHEETS  AND   CONSOLIDATED
                  STATEMENTS  OF  OPERATIONS  FOUND  ON  PAGES 1, 2 AND 3 OF THE
                  COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE YEAR-TO-DATE,  AND IS QUALIFIED IN
                  ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>


<S>                                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                             9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                         JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                              MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                                              253,783
<SECURITIES>                                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                     2,570,793
<ALLOWANCES>                                                       (147,500)
<INVENTORY>                                                       4,574,651
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                  7,520,064
<PP&E>                                                            4,778,386
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   (2,910,333)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                    9,474,997
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                             3,761,196
<BONDS>                                                           2,733,448
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                                               0
<COMMON>                                                             55,406
<OTHER-SE>                                                        2,878,316
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                      9,474,997
<SALES>                                                          14,465,557
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                 14,465,557
<CGS>                                                            11,631,550
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    11,631,550
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                  2,249,624
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                 (226,918)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                     418,504
<INCOME-TAX>                                                        100,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 318,504
<DISCONTINUED>                                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                                        318,504
<EPS-BASIC>                                                             .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                           .06


</TABLE>
#### Catherine KANDOU, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 12-71173.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted April 7, 2014.*

Decided April 11, 2014.

David M. Haghighi, Law Offices of David M. Haghighi, APC, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, Aimee J. Carmichael, Trial, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: TASHIMA, GRABER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

*490MEMORANDUM **

Catherine Kandou, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. *Najmabadi v. Holder, 597*F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir.2010). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Kandou’s untimely motion to reopen because she did not establish changed circumstances in Indonesia to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(h); *Najmabadi,*597 F.3d at 988-89 (petitioner’s evidence was not “qualitatively different” because it described conditions similar to those in evidence at her prior proceedings). In light of this conclusion, we do not reach Kan-dou’s arguments regarding prima facie eligibility for relief.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2322

To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to clarify

that certain footwear assembled in CBI beneficiary countries is excluded

from duty-free treatment.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 27, 1993

Ms. SNOWE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United

States to clarify that certain footwear assembled in CBI

beneficiary countries is excluded from duty-free treatment.

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

3 SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF FOOTWEAR AND LEATHER-RE4 LATED PRODUCTS.

5 U.S. Note 2 to subchapter II of chapter 98 of the

6 Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

7 amended—
2

•HR 2322 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (b), by inserting ‘‘footwear,

2 leather-related products,’’ after ‘‘apparel article,’’;

3 (2) by striking the flush sentence following sub4 paragraph (ii); and

5 (3) by adding at the end thereof the following

6 new paragraph:

7 ‘‘(c) As used in this note—

8 ‘‘(i) the term ‘beneficiary country’ means a

9 country listed in general note 3(c)(v)(A); and

10 ‘‘(ii) the term ‘leather-related products’ means

11 articles of handbags, luggage, flat goods, work

12 gloves, and leather wearing apparel described in sec13 tion 213(h)(1) of the Caribbean Basin Economic Re14 covery Act (19 U.S.C. 2703(h)(1)).’’.

15 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

16 (a) IN GENERAL.—The amendments made by section

17 1 apply with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from

18 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after

19 the date of the enactment of this Act.

20 (b) RETROACTIVE APPLICATION TO TERMINATION OF

21 PREVIOUS SUSPENSION.—Notwithstanding section 514 of

22 the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514) or any other pro23 vision of law, upon proper request filed with the appro24 priate customs officer before the 90th day after the date

25 of the enactment of this Act, any entry, or withdrawal
3

•HR 2322 IH

1 from warehouse for consumption, of any good described

2 in the amendments made by section 1 shall, if such entry

3 or withdrawal was made—

4 (1) after September 30, 1992; and

5 (2) before the 15th day after the date of the en6 actment of this Act;

7 be liquidated or reliquidated as though such entry or with8 drawal occurred on the 15th day after the date of the en9 actment of this Act.

Æ
1st Amendment to Purchase Option



 Exhibit 10.8 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO OPTION TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT 
 THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO OPTION TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT
(“First Amendment”) is made and entered into as of April 13, 2006 (the “First Amendment Effective Date”), by and among BioZone Laboratories, Inc., a corporation formed under the laws of the State of California or its assigns
(individually and collectively, “BioZone”), and ALCiS Health, Inc., a corporation formed under the laws of the California (“ALCiS”). Except as noted below, the Option to Purchase Agreement
(“Agreement”), dated as of November 4, 2005, between the parties shall remain in full force and effect. 
 NOW THEREFORE, in
consideration of the representations and warranties, covenants and conditions set forth herein, and intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties hereto agree as follows: 
  

	 	A.	Section 3(a) of the Agreement shall be amended and replaced in its entirety with the following: 

  

	 	(a)	By April 15, 2006, BioZone shall receive warrants to purchase one hundred thousand (100,000) shares of ALCiS Common Stock at $2.00 per share, with an expiration date of 10
years from the date of issue. For clarification, on March 31, 2006, a merger (“Merger”) between ALCiS and Emerging Delta Corporation (“Delta”) was consummated and each share of ALCiS’ stock was exchanged for 0.16 share
of Delta’s common stock. Following the Merger, the post-Merger public entity is granting a stock dividend of 5.25 shares to each of its shareholders which has the effect of a 6.25 for 1 stock split, in effect restoring the number of shares
originally held by all ALCiS shareholders pre-Merger. This warrant to BioZone already incorporates any adjustment due for the 5.25 for 1 share dividend, and shall not be further adjusted as a result of such dividend. 

  

	 	B.	BioZone hereby directs and instructs ALCiS to title the warrants in Section 3(a), due under the provision as modified above, in the following names and amounts:


  

				
	 Owner Name
	  	%	 
		  		
		  		
		  		
	 Total
	  	100	%

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this First Amendment as of the First
Amendment Effective Date set forth above. 
  

							
	ALCIS HEALTH, INC.	 	BIOZONE LABORATORIES, INC.
				
	By:	 	 /s/ Brian Berchtold
	 	By:	 	 /s/ Daniel Fisher

		 	Brian Berchtold	 		 	Daniel Fisher
		 	Chief Executive Officer	 		 	President
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2497 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2497

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
 deduction for the health insurance costs of self-employed individuals 
      and to increase the deduction to 100 percent of such costs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 23, 1993

  Mr. Frank of Massachusetts introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
 deduction for the health insurance costs of self-employed individuals 
      and to increase the deduction to 100 percent of such costs.

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

SECTION 1. FULL DEDUCTION FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COSTS OF SELF-EMPLOYED 
              INDIVIDUALS.

    (a) Deduction Made Permanent.--
            (1) In general.--Subsection (l) of section 162 of the 
        Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special rules for 
        health insurance costs of self-employed individuals) is amended 
        by striking paragraph (6).
            (2) Conforming amendment.--Subsection (a) of section 110 of 
        the Tax Extension Act of 1991 is amended by striking paragraph 
        (2).
            (3) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
        shall apply to taxable years ending after June 30, 1992.
    (b) Deduction Increased to 100 Percent.--
            (1) In general.--Paragraph (1) of section 162(l) of such 
        Code is amended by striking ``25 percent'' and inserting ``100 
        percent''.
            (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
        shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1993.

                                 <all>
```
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2504

To amend title 10, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense

to adopt centralized procedures for providing notice to victims and witnesses of the status of prisoners in military correctional facilities.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 23, 1993

Mr. KYL (for himself and Mr. SKELTON) introduced the following bill; which

was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

A BILL

To amend title 10, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to adopt centralized procedures for

providing notice to victims and witnesses of the status

of prisoners in military correctional facilities.

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

•HR 2504 IH

1 SECTION 1. IMPROVED PROCEDURES FOR NOTIFICATION

2 OF VICTIMS AND WITNESSES OF STATUS OF

3 PRISONERS IN MILITARY CORRECTIONAL FA4 CILITIES.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—(1) Chapter 48 of title 10, United

6 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the follow7 ing new section:

8 ‘‘§ 957. Status of prisoners: procedures for notifying

9 victims and witnesses

10 ‘‘The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe procedures

11 and implement a centralized system for notice of the sta12 tus of offenders confined in military correctional facilities

13 to be provided to victims and witnesses. Such procedures

14 shall, to the maximum extent practicable, be consistent

15 with procedures of the Federal Bureau of Prisons for vic16 tim and witness notification.’’.

17 (2) The table of sections at the beginning of such

18 chapter is amended by adding at the end the following

19 new item:

‘‘957. Status of prisoners: procedures for notifying victims and witnesses.’’.

20 (b) DEADLINE FOR PRESCRIBING PROCEDURES.—

21 The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe the procedures

22 required by section 957 of title 10, United States Code,

23 as added by subsection (a), not later than six months after

24 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
IIA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2647

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

AUGUST 3 (legislative day, JUNE 30), 1993

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

AN ACT

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide that

the effective date of any changes in benefits under the

Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance program shall be

based on the International Date Line.

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

3 SECTION 1. EFFECTIVE DATE FOR CHANGES IN SERVICE4 MEN’S GROUP LIFE INSURANCE PROGRAM.

5 (a) USE OF INTERNATIONAL DATE LINE.—Section

6 1967 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by add7 ing at the end the following new subsection:
2

•HR 2647 RFS

1 ‘‘(f) The effective date and time for any change in

2 benefits under the Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance

3 program shall be based on the date and time according

4 to the time zone immediately west of the International

5 Date Line.’’.

6 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

7 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to amendments to

8 chapter 19 of title 38, United States Code, that take effect

9 after November 29, 1992.

Passed the House of Representatives August 2,

1993.

Attest: DONNALD K. ANDERSON,

Clerk.
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2554

To amend the Age Discrimination in Employment Amendments of 1986

to prevent the repeal of the exemption for certain bona fide hiring

and retirement plans applicable to State and local firefighters and law

enforcement officers.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 29, 1993

Mr. MURPHY (for himself, Mr. GOODLING, Mr. SARPALIUS, Mr. LEWIS of

Florida, Mr. GORDON, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. HASTINGS, Mr. LIVINGSTON,

Mr. BRYANT, Ms. DANNER, Mr. DEUTSCH, Mr. PAYNE of Virginia, Mr.

NEAL of North Carolina, Mr. GOSS, Mr. TOWNS, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr.

KLECZKA, Mr. FAWELL, Mr. FILNER, Mr. BAKER of Louisiana, Mr.

JACOBS, Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts, Mr. RAVENEL, Mr. BROWN of

Ohio, Mr. KREIDLER, Mr. EMERSON, Mr. DIAZ-BALART, Mr. LIPINSKI,

Mr. SANDERS, Mr. DE LA GARZA, Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota, Mrs.

MORELLA, Mr. BLACKWELL, Mrs. CLAYTON, Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas,

Mr. HOAGLAND, Mrs. THURMAN, Mr. POSHARD, Mrs. MEEK, Mr. GALLO,

Mr. MACHTLEY, Mr. HYDE, Mr. SHAW, Mr. COPPERSMITH, Mr. MCNULTY, Mr. PORTER, Mr. ROTH, Mr. PASTOR, Mrs. UNSOELD, Mr. MORAN,

Mr. BOUCHER, Mr. MAZZOLI, Mr. HUGHES, Mr. WELDON, Mr.

FALEOMAVAEGA, Mr. STUMP, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Ms. SHEPHERD, Mr.

SISISKY, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. ZIMMER, Ms. ENGLISH of Arizona, Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. REED, Mr. REYNOLDS, Mr.

CRANE, Mr. EVERETT, Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas, Ms. BROWN of Florida, Ms. MCKINNEY, Ms. MARGOLIES-MEZVINSKY, Mr. TUCKER, Mr.

PICKETT, Mr. BATEMAN, Mr. KOPETSKI, Mr. SERRANO, Mr. LAFALCE,

Mr. RAMSTAD, Mr. KNOLLENBERG, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, and Mr. HANSEN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Education and Labor

A BILL

To amend the Age Discrimination in Employment Amendments of 1986 to prevent the repeal of the exemption
2

•HR 2554 IH

for certain bona fide hiring and retirement plans applicable to State and local firefighters and law enforcement

officers.

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 ‘‘Firefighters and Police

5 Retirement Security Act of 1993’’.

6 SEC. 2. REPEALER.

7 Section 3(b) of the Age Discrimination in Employ8 ment Amendments of 1986 (29 U.S.C. 623 note) is

9 repealed.

Æ
2009-1904.

#### Torrance v. Grant.

In Mandamus and Prohibition. On October 26, 2009, this court found Saint Torrance to be a vexatious litigator under S.Ct.Prae.R. XIV(5)(B). This court further ordered that Torrance was prohibited from continuing or instituting legal proceedings in this court without first obtaining leave. Upon review of the documents filed in this ease, the court finds the ease to be without merit. Accordingly,

It is ordered by the court, sua sponte, that the case is dismissed.
Plant Management

Submit an Enrollment Request for Plant Management Role

Welcome to the Public Health Information System. In this demonstration, you will 

learn how to submit an enrollment request for Plant Management. I’ll guide you 

through the steps of accomplishing this task.

Login to PHIS using your eAuth User ID and password and then click the Login button.
First, click Submit Enrollment Request.

The FSIS enrollment request wizard page appears.
Read the content on the Enrollment Request page and click Next.

Select the appropriate Account Type from the drop-down.
Click Next to continue.

Select Plant Management from the Role drop-down.
Click Next to continue.

Select the Domestic Establishment name or number, then click Find.
Click Select for the desired establishment.

Scroll down to the bottom of the page.
Click Next to continue.

Entering additional information is optional.
Click Next to continue.

Adding comments is optional.
Click Next to continue.

Review information for accuracy.

Scroll down to view entire page.
Review information for accuracy.

If any content is incorrect, click Previous to get to the page that needs updating.

Make the corrections and click Next until you are back to this screen.

Click Finish.
The Enrollment Request Summary page appears.

Read the guidance in the yellow box for next steps.

Scroll down to view the entire page.

Review the information for accuracy. Then, scroll up to the top of the page.
Click Log out.

This is the end of this exercise. You will now be returned to the introductory screen. 

Thanks for your interest in the Public Health Information System.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

August 17, 2018

No. 04

- 18

- 00258

- CV

THIRTY

- EIGHT THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS

($38,400.00) UNITED STATES CURRENCY

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 4 08th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CI00346

Honorable Antonia Arteaga, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

The Appellant ’ s Motion for Disco very is hereby DENIED.

_________________________________ Marialyn Barnard, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 17th day of August, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court