alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Disaster Response Grants**

**Template for**

**Budget Adjustment Request**

**Note:** The enclosed document is provided as a sample format for requesting budget adjustments within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Crisis Counseling Assistance and Training Program (CCP) Regular Services Program (RSP) grants. States have the authority to move funds, up to a cumulative 10 percent of the total budget, from one line item to another without requesting approval. Any budget adjustments between a cumulative 11–24 percent must be approved by the Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS) project officer. Any budget adjustments above a cumulative 25 percent must be approved by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) grants management officer. Once this threshold has been met, all modifications must be approved. The actual object class categories used for the attached budget table must correspond with the object classes in the approved budget. It is recommended that states consult with their CMHS project officer prior to any budget modification. 

**U.S. Department of Health and Human Services**

**Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration**

**Center for Mental Health Services**

CCP Application Toolkit, Version 4.0 

March 2013

Template for Budget Adjustment Request, Page 4 of 4

[Name]

Project Officer

Emergency Mental Health and Traumatic Stress Services Branch

Center for Mental Health Services

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration

1 Choke Cherry Road, Room 6–[####]

Rockville, Maryland 20857

Dear [Name],

As the Project Director for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) [####] Regular Services Program crisis counseling grant to [state name], I am writing to request a budget adjustment.  The state received approval for up to [$$$] to provide crisis counseling to disaster survivors.

**Requested Budget Adjustment**

We are requesting to reduce the current budget for [state agency or service provider name] in [budget category] by [$$$].  We are requesting to increase the budget for [State agency or service provider name] in [budget category] by [$$$].

**Rationale**

[Include a brief rationale explaining the necessity of the proposed budget adjustment.]

Attached is a table outlining the new budget for the affected [state agency or service provider name].  Please call me at [###-###-####] if you have any questions.

						Sincerely,

						[Name of Project Director]

cc:	Governor’s Authorized Representative

	Gwendolyn Simpson, SAMHSA Grants Management

	Randall Kinder, FEMA Headquarters

**Signatures**

I request approval for this budget adjustment on behalf of the State of [Name]. 

**State Project Director __________________________	Date _______________**

Approved: ________				Disapproved: _______

**Federal Project Officer  ________________________  	Date _____________**
(61 South. 734.)

No. 19,436.

#### SIMMONS v. STEVENS.

(April 14, 1913.)

*(Syllabus by the Court.)*

Marriagíe (§ 58*) — Annulment—1Threats.

Where one is forced into a marriage contract, under penalty of death if he refuses, the marriage will be decreed null.

[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Marriage, Cent. Dig. §§ 115-123; Dec. Dig. § 58.*]

Appeal from Twenty-fourth Judicial District Court, Parish of East Feliciana; George J. Woodside, Judge.

Action by Henry K. Simmons against Inez Stevens. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Affirmed.

ICilbourne & Walker, of Clinton, for appellant. Wall & Kilbourne, of Clinton, for appellee.

MONROE, J.

Plaintiff prays that his marriage with defendant be decreed null, on the ground that he was forced into the contract by threats upon his life. The judge a quo gave judgment as prayed for, and defendant has appealed. The evidence in the record abundantly sustains the judgment. It shows that defendant’s father sent word to plaintiff that he “Would have to marry the girl or they would kill him”; the pronoun “they” referring to a crowd of some 10 or 15 men, armed with guns, who followed the messenger and confirmed his message. One of the party, with defendant’s father, then accompanied plaintiff to the courthouse, where a license was obtained, after which the entire party reassembled at the residence of defendant’s father, where the marriage ceremony was performed. Plaintiff was then permitted to go his way, which he did, leaving defendant at her father’s house.

Judgment affirmed.
# C_2012025EN.01005002.xml

| 28.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/50

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 December 2011 — Aktieselskabet af 21. november 2001 v OHIM — Parfums Givenchy (only givenchy)

(Case T-586/10) (1)

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark ‘only givenchy’ - Earlier Community and national word marks ONLY - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Reputation - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009)

(2012/C 25/97)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Aktieselskabet af 21. november 2001 (Brande, Denmark) (represented by: C. Barrett Christiansen, lawyer)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: V. Melgar, Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Parfums Givenchy SA (Levallois-Perret, France)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 7 October 2010 (Case R 1556/2009-2) concerning opposition proceedings between Aktieselskabet af 21. november 2001 and Parfums Givenchy SA.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Aktieselskabet af 21. november 2001 to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Aktieselskabet af 21. november 2001 to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 80, 12.3.2011.

---
J-A03034-19

*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Appellee

v.

CRAIG DEVON MURPHY, Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

No. 853 WDA 2018

Appeal from the Order May 15, 2018

in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County,

Criminal Division, at No(s): CP-02-CR-0009419-2004

BEFORE: BOWES, J., SHOGAN, J. and STRASSBURGER, J.*

JUDGMENT ORDER BY STRASSBURGER, J.: FILED MARCH 01, 2019

Craig Devon Murphy (Appellant) pro se appeals from the order entered

May 15, 2018, vacating a prior order of expungement. This appeal was

scheduled for oral argument, upon the request of Appellant, and notice was

served on December 13, 2018. The Commonwealth appeared for argument,

but Appellant did not. Despite submitting several filings to this Court,

including an appellate brief, reply brief, request for oral argument, and an

application for correction,1 Appellant did not request a continuance or

otherwise inform this Court of his absence. Based on Appellant’s failure to

appear, we dismiss this appeal. See Pa.R.A.P. 2314 (“If appellant or the

1 In light of our disposition, we deny Appellant’s “Application for Correction or

Modification of Record Pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1926(b)(1).”
J-A03034-19

- 2 -

moving party is not ready to proceed when a case is called for oral argument,

the matter may be dismissed as of course.”).

Appeal dismissed.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 3/01/2019
### §657m. Plans to secure sufficient office space

#### (a) Plans required

The Administrator shall develop long-term plans to secure sufficient office space to accommodate an expanded workforce in times of disaster.

#### (b) Report

The Administrator shall include a report on the plans developed under subsection (a) each time the Administration submits a report required under section 657o of this title.

(Pub. L. 85–536, §2[41], as added Pub. L. 110–234, title XII, §12076, May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1415, and Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title XII, §12076, June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2177.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 enacted identical sections. Pub. L. 110–234 was repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Enactment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as a note under section 8701 of Title 7, Agriculture.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,975
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  151,523
<ALLOWANCES>                                    23,029
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           5,923
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,626
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 147,833
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          109,786
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               49
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      31,080
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   147,833
<SALES>                                         32,317
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                33,422
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,977
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   719
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,019
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    707
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       707
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23.1



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference of our report dated February
22, 1999 on our audits of the consolidated financial statements and our
report dated February 22, 1999 on our audits of the financial statement
schedule of Global Marine Inc. and subsidiaries, as of December 31, 1998
and 1997, and for the years ended December 31, 1998, 1997 and 1996, which
reports are included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, into (i) the
prospectus constituting part of the Company's Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 33-32088, 33-40961 and 33-63326), respectively,
for the Global Marine Inc. 1989 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, (ii) the
prospectus constituting part of the Company's Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-40266) for the Global Marine Savings Incentive
Plan, (iii) the prospectus constituting part of the Company's Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-40961) for the Global Marine Inc.
1990 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan, and (iv) the prospectus
constituting part of the Company's Registration Statement on Form S-8
(Registration No. 33-57691) for the Global Marine Inc. 1994 Non-Employee
Stock Option and Incentive Plan, and (v) the prospectus constituting part of
the Company's Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration Nos. 33-58577
and 333-49807) for the proposed offering of up to $500,000,000 of debt
securities, preferred stock and/or common stock.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Houston, Texas
March 16, 1999
Meeting tomorrow on NO2 monitoring

Lydia Wegman to: Heid King 01/18/2010 12:16 PM

Cc: Richard Wayland, "Nealson Watkins", "Scott Jenkins", "Karen Martin", "Tricia 

Crabtree"

Heidi,

I hope you're feeling better and are having a good weekend. 

Following the management discussion today, we'd like to meet with you tomorrow, rather than wait until 

Wednesday, to discuss the issue of how many near-road monitors we will require in the NO2 rule. Do you 

have time to talk tomorrow after 10 AM? Please let me know. 

Lydia
Exhibit No. 32.1
----------------
Form 10-QSB
Senior Optician Service, Inc.
File No. 0-28683


          Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted
            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Senior Optician  Service,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Donald Hill,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002,  that:  (1) the Report  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of
Section  13(a) or  15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934;  and (2) the
information  contained in the Report fairly presents,  in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: October 21, 2004                            By:       /s/ Donald Hill
      ----------------                               ---------------------------
                                                                     Donald Hill
                                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                                     and Chief Financial Officer


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Senior  Optician  Service,  Inc.  and will be  retained  by Senior
Optician  Service,  Inc.  and  furnished  to the U. S.  Securities  and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 33.23 Limitations on fund use. In order to insure the most efficient and effective use of grant funds, the Justice Assistance Act places restrictions on the award of block monies for routine equipment, personnel costs, construction, supplanting of state and local funds, and land acquisition. ( a ) *Equipment and hardware.* The purchase or acquisition of equipment or hardware with grant funds is prohibited unless the purchase or acquisition is an incidental and necessary part of a program. Section 406(c)(1) of the Act.
( b ) *General salaries and personnel costs.* Payment of personnel costs with grant funds is prohibited unless the costs are an incidental and necessary part of a program. Section 406(c)(1) of the Act. Programs which have as their primary purpose the payment of usual salaries paid to employees generally, or to specific classes of employees within a jurisdiction, are prohibited. Notwithstanding the above, grant funds may be used to compensate personnel for time engaged in conducting or undergoing training programs or the compensation of personnel engaged in research, development demonstration, or short-term programs. Section 406(c)(2) of the Act.
( c ) *Construction.* Construction projects are prohibited. Section 406(c)(3) of the Act.
( d ) *Land acquisition.* Acquisition of land with grant funds is prohibited. Section 406(c)(3) of the Act.
( e ) *Ineffective programs.* The use of grant funds is prohibited for programs or projects which, based upon evaluations by the National Institute of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics, state or local agencies, and other public or private organizations, have been demonstrated to offer a low probability of improving the functioning of the criminal justice system. The Bureau of Justice Assistance will formally identify ineffective programs by notice in the Federal Register after opportunity for public comment. Section 406(c)(4) of the Act.
( f ) *Administrative costs.* The use of grant funds to pay for costs incurred in applying for or administering the block grant is prohibited. Block grant funds may only be used to carry out programs that fall within one of the purposes listed in section 403(a) of the Justice Assistance Act. Section 403(a) of the Act.
( g ) *Period of project support.* A grant recipient may receive block grant funds for a specific program or project for a period not to exceed four years. The four-year maximum allowable period of funding includes any period prior to the Justice Assistance Act when the program or project was supported by funds made available under title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act. Section 403(c) of the Act.
( h ) *Non-supplantation.* Block grant funds shall not be used to supplant state or local funds, but will be used to increase the amounts of such funds that would, in the absence of Federal aid, be made available for criminal justice activities. Section 405(2) of the Act.
J. 

petition. Appellant, however, failed to provide specific facts relating to his 

alleged deprivation of access to the law library, and thus failed to 

demonstrate that prison officials interfered with his ability to file a timely 

petition. Hathaway v. State, 119 Nev. 248, 252, 71 P.3d 503, 506 (2003); 

Phelps v. Dir. Nev. Dep't of Prisons, 104 Nev. 656, 660, 764 P.2d 1303, 

1306 (1988). Therefore, the district court did not err in denying this claim. 

Appellant also claimed that the ineffective assistance of trial 

and appellate counsel provided cause for the delay in filing his petition. 

Appellant failed to demonstrate cause for the delay because these claims 

were reasonably available to be raised in a timely petition and ineffectiveassistance-of-counsel claims that are themselves procedurally barred 

cannot establish cause. Hathaway, 119 Nev. at 252-53, 71 P.3d at 506. 

Therefore, the district court did not err in denying the petition as 

procedurally barred, and we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 2 

J. 

2We have reviewed all documents that appellant has submitted in 

proper person to the clerk of this court in this matter, and we conclude 

that no relief based upon those submissions is warranted. To the extent 

that appellant has attempted to present claims or facts in those 

submissions which were not previously presented in the proceedings 

below, we have declined to consider them in the first instance. 

2 
cc: Hon. Doug Smith, District Judge 

Joseph Dan Baker 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

3
### §§19 to 19c. Repealed. Pub. L. 90–209, §2, Dec. 18, 1967, 81 Stat. 656

Sections, act July 10, 1935, ch. 375, §§1–3, 5, 49 Stat. 477, 478, related to: creation of National Park Trust Fund Board, its composition, conduct of business, and compensation; authority to accept and administer gifts, disposition of income, and limitations thereof; succession, powers as trustee, and jurisdiction of suits; and exemption of gifts from taxation, respectively.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 832 

To nullify the Supplemental Treaty Between the United States of America 

and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of Indians of Middle Oregon, 

concluded on November 15, 1865. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 14, 2019 

Mr. MERKLEY (for himself and Mr. WYDEN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs 

A BILL 

To nullify the Supplemental Treaty Between the United 

States of America and the Confederated Tribes and 

Bands of Indians of Middle Oregon, concluded on November 15, 1865. 

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

3 SECTION 1. NULLIFICATION OF TREATY. 

4 The Supplemental Treaty Between the United States 

5 of America and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of In6 dians of Middle Oregon, concluded on November 15, 1865, 

7 and entered into pursuant to the Senate resolution of ratiVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:22 Mar 29, 2019 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S832.IS S832

pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 832 IS

1 fication dated March 2, 1867 (14 Stat. 751), shall have 

2 no force or effect. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
ADOPTED PURSUANTTO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 29, 2008
of the Company, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  /s/ Deborah H. MerrillDeborah H. MerrillVice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer
###### Editorial Note on Part 0

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 0 appear at 73 FR 73 FR 54947, Sept. 24, 2008.

#### § 0.177a Antitrust civil investigative demands.

The Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division is authorized to issue orders pursuant to section 6004 of title 18, United States Code, to compel testimony in response to antitrust civil investigative demands for oral testimony. Issuance of such orders shall be subject to the concurrence of the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division.

[Order No. 753-77, 42 FR 56730, Oct. 28, 1977]
### §247. Homestead, mineral, and other rights unaffected

That nothing herein contained shall affect any valid existing claim, location, or entry under the land laws of the United States, whether for homestead, mineral, right-of-way, or any other purposes whatsoever, or shall affect the right of any such claimant, locator, or entryman to the full use and enjoyment of his land.

(Apr. 25, 1947, ch. 41, §6, formerly §7, 61 Stat. 54; renumbered §6, June 10, 1948, ch. 437, §1, 62 Stat. 352.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Herein, referred to in text, means act Apr. 25, 1947, which was generally classified to this subchapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

The land laws of the United States, referred to in text, are classified generally to Title 43, Public Lands.
#### § 430.27 Emergencies.

In the event of an emergency requiring immediate action to protect the public health and safety or to avoid substantial and irreparable injury to any private person or property, and the circumstances do not permit full review and determination in accordance with these regulations, the Executive Director, with the concurrence of the Pennsylvania member of the Commission or his alternate, may issue an emergency permit authorizing an applicant to take such action relating to these regulations as the Executive Director may deem necessary and proper. In such cases, the applicant shall be fully responsible for protecting existing ground water users, as prescribed in § 430.19 of this part. The Executive Director shall report at the next meeting of the Commission on the nature of the emergency and any action taken under this section.

[47 FR 21776, May 20, 1982. Redesignated at 51 FR 25031, July 10, 1986]