alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Pease Piano Company, Appellant, v. Hiram Sarles, Respondent.

*Appeal*— *absence of exception*— *new theory from that at trial.*

*,*Appeal from a judgment entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 19th day of June, 1907, upon the verdict of a jury, and also from an order entered on the same day denying a motion for a new trial.

Per Curiam:

The point upon which the appellant relies is not presented by any exception and was not raised below. The case was tried upon-an entirely different theory, and its trial upon that theory was acquiesced in by appellant »s well as by the defendant. Upon that theory the record presents no reversible error. Judgment affirmed, "with costs. Present — Patterson, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Houghton and Scott, JJ. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
No. 89-6859.

#### Pedroncelli *v.*United States.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
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 Health and Human Services

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

*Correction:*                     This notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on December 29, 2010, Volume 75, Number 249, page 82030. The first day of the meeting was canceled. The time and date of the meeting were as follows:                

*Time and Date:*                     8:30 a.m.-2 p.m., January 28, 2011.                

There was no change to the matters discussed at the meeting.

*Contact Person for More Information:*                     Virginia S. Cain, Ph.D., Director of Extramural Research, NCHS/CDC, 3311 Toledo Road, Room 7211, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, telephone (301) 458-4500, fax (301) 458-4020.                

                    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                     **Federal Register**                     notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                

Dated: February 9, 2011.

Elaine L. Baker,

Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2011-3533 Filed 2-15-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
### **CHAPTER 811—DISTRIBUTION IN GRADE**

Sec.
8101.
Prescribed number; vacancies.
8102.
Regular Navy: retired flag officers on active duty.
8103.
Suspension: preceding sections.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2018**—Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title VIII, §807(e)(2)(B), (f)(1), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1837, 1838, redesignated chapter 533 of this title as this chapter and items 5441, 5450, and 5451 as 8101 to 8103, respectively.

**1996**—Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title XV, §1501(c)(20), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 499, struck out item 5454 "Computations: rule when fraction occurs in final result".

**1994**—Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI, §1673(b)(1), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 3016, struck out items 5456 "Naval Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve", 5457 "Naval Reserve: officers in an active status in grades above chief warrant officer, W–⁠5", and 5458 "Marine Corps Reserve: officers in an active status in grades above chief warrant officer, W–⁠5".

**1991**—Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title XI, §1131(8)(B), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1506, substituted "W–⁠5" for "W–4" in items 5457 and 5458.

**1990**—Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title IV, §403(b)(2)(B), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1545, struck out items 5442 "Navy: line officers on active duty; rear admirals (lower half) and rear admirals", 5443 "Marine Corps: officers on active duty; brigadier generals and major generals", 5444 "Navy: staff corps officers on active duty; rear admirals (lower half) and rear admirals", and 5446 "Application: sections 5442, 5443, 5444".

**1985**—Pub. L. 99–145, title V, §514(b)(6)(B), (7)(B), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 629, substituted "rear admirals (lower half)" for "commodores" in items 5442 and 5444.

**1981**—Pub. L. 97–86, title IV, §405(b)(6)(B), (7)(B), Dec. 1, 1981, 95 Stat. 1106, substituted "commodores" for "commodore admirals" in items 5442 and 5444.

Pub. L. 97–22, §10(b)(6)(B), July 10, 1981, 95 Stat. 137, struck out item 5455 "Computations and determinations: effect on status of officers".

**1980**—Pub. L. 96–513, title V, §§503(18), 513(9)(A), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2912, 2931, inserted "; commodore admirals and rear admirals" in item 5442, inserted "; brigadier generals and major generals" in item 5443, inserted "; commodore admirals and rear admirals" in item 5444, struck out items 5445 "Suspension: sections 5442, 5443, 5444", 5447 "Navy: line officers on the active list; permanent grade", 5448 "Marine Corps: officers on the active list; permanent grade", 5449 "Navy: staff corps officers on the active list; permanent grade", and 5452 "Navy: women line officers on active duty; Marine Corps: women officers on active duty", and substituted "in grades" for "in permanent grades" in items 5457 and 5458.

**1967**—Pub. L. 90–130, §1(17)(F), (H), Nov. 8, 1967, 81 Stat. 377, struck out item 5453 "Marine Corps: women officers on the active list; permanent grade", and substituted: "Navy: women line officers on active duty; Marine Corps: women officers on active duty" for "Navy: women line officers on the active list; permanent grade" in item 5452.

**1958**—Pub. L. 85–861, §1(113)(B), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1492, added items 5457 and 5458.
**MIDLAND CAPITAL HOLDINGS CORPORATION****EXHIBIT 11****STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE**                   Three Months Ended  Six Months Ended   December 31,  December 31,   2005  2004  2005  2004 Net Income $253,392  $233,616  $527,241  $473,281              Weightedaverage common shares outstanding for basic computation  372,600   372,600   372,600   372,600               Basic earnings per share $0.68  $0.63  $1.42  $1.27               Weightedaverage common shares outstanding for basic computation  372,600   372,600   372,600   372,600  Common stockequivalents due to dilutive effect of stock options  —   —   —   —               Weightedaverage common shares and equivalents outstanding for diluted computation  372,600   372,600   372,600   372,600               Diluted earnings per share $0.68  $0.63  $1.42  $1.27
MIDLAND CAPITAL HOLDINGS CORPORATION

EXHIBIT 11 - STATEMENT REGARDING COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                            Three Months Ended        Six Months Ended
                                                December 31,             December 31,
                                             1999        1998         1999         1998
                                           ---------   ---------    ---------   ---------
<S>                                          <C>           <C>      <C>             <C>

Net Income                                 $ 82,642    $ 85,327     $130,835     $227,884
                                           ========    ========     ========     ========

Weighted average common shares
  outstanding for basic computation         363,975     363,975      363,975      363,975
                                           ========    ========     ========     ========

Basic earnings per share                   $   0.23    $   0.24     $    .36     $    .63
                                           ========    ========     ========     ========


Weighted average common shares
  outstanding for basic computation         363,975     363,975      363,975      363,975

Common stock equivalents due to
  dilutive effect of stock options            3,598       4,539        3,689        4,870
                                           --------    --------     --------     --------

Weighted average common shares and
  equivalents outstanding for
  diluted computation                       367,573     368,514      367,664      368,845
                                           ========    ========     ========     ========

Diluted earnings per share                 $   0.22    $   0.23      $  0.36      $  0.62
                                           ========    ========     ========     ========



</TABLE>
#### § 170.619 Do Tribal preference and Indian preference apply to TTP funding?

Tribal preference and Indian preference apply to TTP funding as shown in the following table:

| If . . . | Then . . . |
| --- | --- |
| (a) A contract serves a single Tribe | Section 7(c) under Title 1 of ISDEAA allows Tribal employment or contract preference laws, including Tribe local preference laws, to govern. |
| (b) A contract serves more than one Tribe | Section 7(b) under Title 1 of ISDEAA applies. |
| (c) A self-governance agreement exists under Title IV of ISDEAA | 25 CFR 1000.406 applies. |
| (d) A Program Agreement | The language of the Program Agreement applies. |
Shoreline II Outfitter/Guide
Project Area

Gustavus )
04-16A ©@

04-16
aso)

ie

0.
Pelican &

04-15

01-05B

Admiralty’
Island

01-05D

[___] Use Area

HEE Non National Forest Land

0 5 10 20

Miles pander
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2022-1679

_____________________________

MAREK K. SPERZYNSKI and

KAZIMIERA M. SPERSYNSKA,

Appellants,

v.

HOLLEY BY THE SEA 

IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION,

INC., U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A., as 

Trustee for LSF9 Master 

Participation Trust,

Appellees.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County.

Clifton A. Drake, Judge.

December 11, 2023

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, WINOKUR, and LONG, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Todd M. LaDouceur, Chris K. Ritchie, Galloway, Johnson, 

Tompkins, Burr & Smith, P.L.C., Pensacola, for Appellants.

Sara F. Holladay, Emily Y. Rottmann, E. Paul Cuffe,

McGuireWoods LLP, Jacksonville, for Appellees.
September 3, 2015

Mr. Mario Quenneville

ISM International Inc.

3108 Downing Street

Clearwater, FL 33759

Dear Mr. Quenneville :

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

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We received your exemption request on behalf of ISM International Inc. filed in D ocket

No

. FAA− 20 15

− 1839 , but we are unable to process your request any further. Your petition

does no t comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the

request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

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

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption

would provide a level of safety at least equal to t hat provided by the rule from which you

seek an exemption.

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

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit

http://aes.faa.gov/pe tition/index.html . This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal

Aviation A dministration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any

questions you may have.2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemptio n.

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further.

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267

- 2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure s34
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Graham Packaging Holdings Company on Form 10-Q/A Amendment No. 1 for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John E. Hamilton, 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 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 Graham Packaging Holdings Company. |

 

 

Date:  November 14, 2005

 

 

| By:    | /s/ John E. Hamilton    |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | John E. Hamilton        |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |
§ 162.203 When can the regulations in this subpart be superseded or modified by tribal laws and leasing policies? ( a ) The regulations in this subpart may be superseded or modified by tribal laws, under the circumstances described in § 162.109(b) of this part.
( b ) When specifically authorized by an appropriate tribal resolution establishing a general policy for the leasing of tribal and individually-owned agricultural land, we will: ( 1 ) Waive the general prohibition against tenant preferences in leases advertised for bid under § 162.212 of this subpart, by allowing prospective Indian tenants to match the highest responsible bid (unless the tribal leasing policy specifies some other manner in which the preference must be afforded);
( 2 ) Waive the requirement that a tenant post a bond under § 162.234 of this subpart;
( 3 ) Modify the requirement that a tenant post a bond in a form described in § 162.235 of this subpart;
( 4 ) Approve leases of tribal land at rates established by the tribe, as provided in § 162.222(b) of this subpart.
( c ) When specifically authorized by an appropriate tribal resolution establishing a general policy for the leasing of “highly fractionated undivided heirship lands” (as defined in the tribal leasing policy), we may waive or modify the three-month notice requirement in § 162.209(b) of this subpart, so long as: ( 1 ) The tribal law or leasing policy adopts an alternative plan for providing notice to Indian landowners, before an agricultural lease is granted by us on their behalf; and
( 2 ) A waiver or modification of the three-month notice requirement is needed to prevent waste, reduce idle land acreage, and ensure lease income to the Indian landowners.
( d ) Tribal leasing policies of the type described in paragraphs (b) through (c) of this section will not apply to individually-owned land that has been made exempt from such laws or policies under § 162.205 of this subpart.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Jobs for Which You Can Qualify If You're Not a High School Graduate

              																	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Jobs for Which You Can Qualify If You're Not a High School Graduate*,										May 1980,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/866,			accessed on September 22, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-1635

CLARETTA C. GREEN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DENIS R. MCDONOUGH, Secretary of Veterans Affairs,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge. (2:18-cv-00788-DCN)

Submitted: March 2, 2021 Decided: March 22, 2021

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Edward M. Brown, EDWARD M. BROWN LAW FIRM, Charleston, South Carolina, for 

Appellant. Peter M. McCoy, Jr., United States Attorney, William Hammond Jordan, 

Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, 

Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Claretta C. Green, an African American female, appeals the district court’s order 

accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to grant summary judgment in favor of 

the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) on Green’s race and sex discrimination claims, 

brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), 42 U.S.C. 

§§ 2000e to 2000e-17.*

 On appeal, Green assigns error to the district court’s determination 

that Green failed to adequately plead that the VA’s failure to comply with its post-payment 

procedures was an adverse employment action to support her discrimination claims. Green 

also asserts that the court erred in finding there were no genuine issues of material fact as 

to whether the VA acted with discriminatory intent when it reported Green to the National 

Practitioner Data Bank and the South Carolina Board of Nursing. 

We have considered the parties’ arguments and reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. See Green v. Wilkie,

No. 2:18-cv-00788-DCN (D.S.C. May 11, 2020). We dispense with oral argument because 

* Green also brought a Title VII harassment claim against the VA, as well as a 

retaliation claim under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 26011-

2654, and a Fifth Amendment due process claim. Green abandoned her harassment and 

FMLA claims in her opposition to the VA’s summary judgment motion, and later 

abandoned her due process claim by failing to object to the magistrate judge’s 

recommendation to dismiss that claim. See Martin v. Duffy, 858 F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 

2017); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 846-47 (4th Cir. 1985).
3

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court 

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
STEAM ELECTRIC CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE

EPA

- HQ

- OW

- 200 9

- 0 819

DCN:_____

__________________________

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS I NFORMATION (CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

U.S. Indo-Pacific CommandUSINDOPACOM

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  Leadership    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Chief of Staff         
  -  Senior Enlisted Leader 
-  About USINDOPACOM    -  History         
  -  USPACOM Area of Responsibility         
  -  USPACOM Previous Commanders         
  -  Women, Peace and Security 
-  Organization    -  Organization Chart 
-  Media    -  News      -  Spotlight 
  -  Photos         
  -  Speeches / Testimony         
  -  Freedom of Information Act      -  FOIA - Reading Room         
    -  Submit FOIA Request         
    -  Request Status         
    -  FOIA FAQS 
-  Resources    -  Travel Requirements         
  -  Useful Theater Information         
  -  FAQ         
  -  Useful Links 
-  Newcomers		 
-  Contact    -  Directory         
  -  Media Inquiries         
  -  Industry Engagements 
-  JTF - Red Hill		 
-  JTF-Micronesia		 

Home : Media : News

USNS Mercy arrives in the Republic of Palau for Pacific Partnership 24-1December 21, 2023 — The hospital ship USNS Mercy (T-AH 19) arrived Dec. 21 in the Republic of Palau to begin the fourth mission stop of Pacific Partnership 24-1, the largest annual multinational humanitarian assistance and disaster relief preparedness mission conducted in the Indo-Pacific region... MORE 

----

Pacific Partnership Kicks Off in VietnamJune 21, 2022 — PHU YEN, Vietnam -- Now in its 17th year, Pacific Partnership is the largest annual multinational humanitarian assistance and disaster relief preparedness mission conducted in the Indo-Pacific. In... MORE 

----

2024 (325)2023 (825)2022 (1193)2021 (1066)2020 (1083)2019 (1166)2018 (1116)2017 (1356)2016 (1475)2015 (1408)2014 (904)2013 (32)2012 (4)

About DoDDoD CareersJoin the MilitaryNewsUSA.govPhotos & VideosPrivacy & SecurityTop Issues

US INDOPACOM Inspector GeneralDoD Inspector General Accessibility/Section 508DoD FOIAUS INDOPACOM FOIALink DisclaimerNo FEAR ActRecovery ActINDOPACOM Webmaster

                  - Facebook
                  - X
                  - YouTube
                  - Instagram
                  - RSS

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
Searched for **https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=8**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=8**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.