alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Síntomas del coronavirus (COVID-19)

cdc.gov/coronavirus-es

CS-317142-G 

Busque atención médica de inmediato si alguien tiene

signos de advertencia de una emergencia del COVID-19

• Dificultad para respirar

• Dolor o presión persistentes en el pecho

• Estado de confusión de aparición reciente

• No puede despertarse

o permanecer despierta

• Labios o cara azulados

Esta lista no incluye todos los síntomas posibles. Llame a su proveedor de atención

médica si tiene cualquier otro síntoma que sea grave o que le preocupe. 

Los síntomas pueden ser de leves a graves, y aparecer de 2 a 14 

días después de la exposición al virus que causa el COVID-19. 

Dolor en el cuerpo

o los músculos

Pérdida reciente del

gusto o del olfato

Vómito o diarrea

Tos, falta de aire o dificultad para respirar Fiebre o escalofríos

Conozca los síntomas del COVID-19, que pueden incluir:
Exhibit 32.2



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 on Form 10-QSB of Quotemedia, Inc. (the Company) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Keith J. Randall, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to my best knowledge and belief, 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                |  |                        
|--------------- |  | -----------------------
|                | 
|By:             |  | /s/ Keith J. Randall   
|                |  | Keith J. Randall       
|                |  | Chief Financial Officer
|August 15, 2005
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 20

- 00019

- CV

Emmanuel John, d/b/a Americo Express, Appellant

v. RLJ Equities, LLC, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COUR T AT LAW NO. 1 OF TR AVIS COUNTY NO. C

- 1

- CV

- 19

- 005325 , THE HONORABLE ERIC SHE PP ERD, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

On January 7, 2020, a ppellant Emmanuel John, d/b/a Americo Express filed a notice of appeal. John appeals from a final judgment signed by the trial court on October 29,
2019

. Because the jud gme nt was signed on October 29, 2019, the notice of appeal w as due to be
filed on or before December 1 , 2019. 1 See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1 ( requiring notice of a ppeal to be filed within 30 days after judgment is signed ) ; see also id. R. 4. 1(a) (e xtending tim e p eriod to file

to next day that is not legal holiday when las t day of period falls on legal holiday)

. That December 1, 2019 deadline might have been extended until December 16 , 201 9 , if John had filed
either a notice of appeal with the trial court or a mot ion for extension of time with this Court

1 John filed an untimely motion for new trial on December 26, 2019

. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b ( establishing that motion for new t rial must be filed prior to or within 30 days after judgment is signed )

. Becaus e hi s motion for n ew trial w as untimely, it did not extend the deadline for filing the notice of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a ) ( 1) (extend ing deadline to file notice of appeal to 90 days if any party timely files motion for new trial )

.2 within 15 days after the deadline for filing the notice of appeal. See id. R. 26.3; Verburgt v.

Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617

- 18 (Tex. 1997) (“[O]nce the period for granting a motion for
extension of time under R ule 41(a)(2) [now Rule 26.3] has passed, a party can no longer invoke the appellate court’s jurisdiction.”). John ’ s January 7, 20 20 notice of appeal is untimely, and we
ther efore lack jurisdiction over this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.1(b) (providing tha t filing notice of appeal invokes appellate court’s jurisdiction), id. R. 2 (establishing that appellate court may not alter time for perfecting appeal in civil case). On January 13, 20 20, a ppellee RLJ Equities, LL C filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, as serting that the Court lacks jurisdiction over the appeal for the reasons stated above

. To date, no response has been filed. See id. R. 10.3(a) (providing that court of appeals should
not determine motion until 10 days after motion was filed). Accordingly, we gra nt appellee ’ s
motion and dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See id. R. 42.3(a).

_

_________________________________________ Edward Smith, Justice
Before Justices Goodwin, Kelly, and Smith
Dismissed for Wa nt of Jurisdiction
Filed: February 6, 2020
### §410ggg–3. Authorization of appropriations

#### (a) In general

#### (1) Oral histories, preservation, and visitor services

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to conduct oral histories and to carry out the preservation, interpretation, education, and other essential visitor services provided for by this subchapter.

#### (2) Artifacts

There are authorized to be appropriated $1,000,000 for the acquisition and curation of historical artifacts related to the park.

#### (b) Property acquisition

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to acquire the properties listed in section 410ggg–1(e)(2) of this title.

#### (c) Limitation on use of funds for S.S. RED OAK VICTORY

None of the funds authorized to be appropriated by this section may be used for the operation, maintenance, or preservation of the vessel S.S. RED OAK VICTORY.

(Pub. L. 106–352, §5, Oct. 24, 2000, 114 Stat. 1372.)
[4910-13-P[

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT AnON

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

(\\0 [Docket No. FAA-2009-I250; Directorate Identifier 200S-NM-169-AD; Amendme

\\or~;AD*0-,9D ID-D9-\\

RlN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; BAE SYSTEMS (Operations) Limited Model

SAe 146-100A, -20GA, and -300A Series Airplanes, and Model AVTo146-RJ70A,

146-RJ85A, and I46-RIIOOA Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation

(DOT).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD) for the

1l(P-T T.

~00 m

3/ZL/io

UTI"" £nlOOL

:T.G- ,

J

10

1~'I1I~LS~K'

\

0~

products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness m:

,-!(, (0

information (MeAl) originated by 3n aviation authority of another country to identi fy ROln'lNG.m\ll(1I.

v\o\-Ilct

and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsaFi'NI/'7j?~'

/7}f{ c'lA,-

condition as: A/T~/! j,!' .Ill. ,

In 1991, the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) issued AD 015-08-91

[which corresponds to FAA AD 93-01-11], requiring the accomplishment

of inspections of, and in case of crack findings, corrective actions on, the

wing top skin at rib '0' of pre-modification HCM00851 C BAe 146 series

aircraft. in accordance with British Aerospace Service Bulletin (SB) 57-41

dated 26 July 1991. Recently, BAE Systems (Operations) Ltd has

detennined that a revised inspection programme for the wing top skin and

joint strap at rib '0' on all BAc 146 and AVRO 146-RJ aircraft is

necessary to assure the continued structural integrity of this area. Cracking

of the wing centre section lap skin, ir undetected, could lead to structural
#### § 36.505 Attorneys fees.

In any action or administrative proceeding commenced pursuant to the Act or this part, the court or agency, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee, including litigation expenses, and costs, and the United States shall be liable for the foregoing the same as a private individual.
#### City of New York, Appellant, v Michael Ring et al., Defendants, and “John Doe” et al., Respondents.

[823 NYS2d 145]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane S. Solomon, J.), entered November 23, 2005, which granted the motion of defendants Khalid Ahmed and Mouman Outlet, Inc., seeking vacatur of that portion of a preliminary injunction issued pursuant to the Nuisance Abatement Law that applied to them, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the preliminary injunction reinstated as to Ahmed and Mouman Outlet.

Plaintiff, the City of New York, obtained a preliminary injunction pursuant to the Nuisance Abatement Law (Administrative Code of City of NY, tit 7, ch 7) prohibiting defendants from maintaining, creating, conducting or permitting a public nuisance. The nuisance that plaintiff sought to abate was the sale of counterfeit trademarked merchandise. Defendants Khalid Ahmed and Mouman Outlet, Inc. (the respondents), subsequently moved to vacate the portion of the injunction that applied to them on the ground that plaintiff failed to demonstrate that they or either of them sold counterfeit goods. In light of plaintiffs removal of counterfeit goods from the premises four months before the hearing on the motion, Supreme Court found *219the issue of whether the respondents were selling counterfeit goods moot and granted the motion. We reverse.

Pending an action for a permanent injunction pursuant to the Nuisance Abatement Law, the court may grant a preliminary injunction enjoining the persons conducting, maintaining or permitting a public nuisance from further conducting, maintaining or permitting the nuisance (Administrative Code § 7-707). Plaintiff submitted ample proof that a public nuisance, as defined by the Nuisance Abatement Law (Administrative Code § 7-703 [1]), existed at the premises occupied by the respondents immediately prior to the commencement of this proceeding. That plaintiff may have removed counterfeit goods from the premises immediately prior to the commencement of this proceeding does not render plaintiffs claim for an injunction moot, as plaintiff has an “ ‘ongoing right to ensure that the [respondents] do not subsequently recommence their illegal activities in the same location’ ” *(City of New York v Partnership 91,*277 AD2d 164, 164 [2000], quoting *City of New York v Mor,*261 AD2d 185, 187 [1999], *appeal dismissed*93 NY2d 1041 [1999]). The availability of other legal remedies (e.g., civil penalties) does not prevent plaintiff from seeking injunctive relief pursuant to the Nuisance Abatement Law (Administrative Code § 7-706 [a]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, McGuire and Malone, JJ.
###### Editorial Note on Part 0

#### Editorial Note:

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

#### § 0.87 Representation on committee for visit-exchange.

The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall be a member of the committee which represents the Department of Justice in the development and implementation of plans for exchanging visits between the Iron Curtain countries and the United States and shall have authority to designate an alternate to serve on such committee.
§ 42.306 Guidelines. ( a ) Recipient agencies are expected to conduct a continuing program of self-evaluation to ascertain whether any of their recruitment, employee selection or promotional policies (or lack thereof) directly or indirectly have the effect of denying equal employment opportunities to minority individuals and women.
( b ) Equal employment program modification may be suggested by LEAA whenever identifiable referral or selection procedures and policies suggest to LEAA the appropriateness of improved selection procedures and policies. Accordingly, any recipient agencies falling within this category are encouraged to develop recruitment, hiring or promotional guidelines under their equal employment opportunity program which will correct, in a timely manner, any identifiable employment impediments which may have contributed to the existing disparities.
MEMORANDUM

Date: January 12, 2017

From: Anita Lee, EPA Region 9

To: Revisions to the Source Specific Federal Implementation Plan for Four Corners Power Plant, Navajo 

Nation (EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0339)

Subject: Teleconferences between Arizona Public Service (APS) and EPA on January 10 and 11, 2017

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Summary: 

APS and EPA spoke on the telephone on four occasions over January 10 and 11, 2017 to clarify aspects 

of the comment letter APS submitted to the EPA on January 3, 2017, and to clarify current operations at 

FCPP.

EPA proposed action on December 2, 2016 (81 FR 86988) to revise the FIP for the Four Corners Power 

Plant. The comment period closed on January 3, 2017.

Attendees:

Arizona Public Service

• Eric Massey

• Mark Hajduk

EPA Region 9

• Colleen McKaughan

• Anita Lee

ATTACHMENT

None
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 2 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

<DOC>

                                                        Calendar No. 13
116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 2

Disapproving the President's proposal to take an action relating to the 
     application of certain sanctions with respect to the Russian 
                              Federation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 4, 2019

 Mr. Schumer introduced the following joint resolution; which was read 
  twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
                                Affairs

                            January 15, 2019

  Committee discharged pursuant to section 216(c)(5)(B) of Public Law 
                   115-44 and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Disapproving the President's proposal to take an action relating to the 
     application of certain sanctions with respect to the Russian 
                              Federation.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves of 
the action relating to the application of sanctions imposed with 
respect to the Russian Federation proposed by the President in the 
report submitted to Congress under section 216(a)(1) of the Russia 
Sanctions Review Act of 2017 on December 19, 2018, relating to 
terminating sanctions imposed on En+ Group plc (``En+''), UC Rusal plc 
(``Rusal''), and JSC EuroSibEnergo (``ESE'').

                                                        Calendar No. 13

116th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              S. J. RES. 2

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the President's proposal to take an action relating to the 
     application of certain sanctions with respect to the Russian 
                              Federation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            January 15, 2019

  Committee discharged pursuant to section 216(c)(5)(B) of Public Law 
                   115-44 and placed on the calendar
```
§ 5.22 Notice of acceptance and ready for environmental analysis. ( a ) When the Commission has determined that the application meets the Commission's requirements as specified in §§ 5.18 and 5.19, the approved studies have been completed, any deficiencies in the application have been cured, and no other additional information is needed, it will issue public notice as required in the Federal Power Act: ( 1 ) Accepting the application for filing and specifying the date upon which the application was accepted for filing (which will be the application filing date if the Secretary receives all of the information and documents necessary to conform to the requirements of §§ 5.1 through 5.21, as applicable, within the time frame prescribed in § 5.20 or § 5.21);
( 2 ) Finding that the application is ready for environmental analysis;
( 3 ) Requesting comments, protests, and interventions;
( 4 ) Requesting recommendations, preliminary terms and conditions, and preliminary fishway prescriptions, including all supporting documentation; and
( 5 ) Establishing the date for final amendments to applications for new or subsequent licenses; and
( 6 ) Updating the schedule issued with the tendering notice for processing the application.
( b ) If the project affects lands of the United States, the Commission will notify the appropriate Federal office of the application and the specific lands affected, pursuant to Section 24 of the Federal Power Act.
( c ) For an application for a license seeking benefits under Section 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, as amended, for a project that would be located at a new dam or diversion, the Applicant must serve the public notice issued under paragraph (a)(1) of this Section to interested agencies at the time the applicant is notified that the application is accepted for filing.
[Order 2002, 68 FR 51121, Aug. 25, 2003; 68 FR 61743, Oct. 30, 2003]
Mr. Mitchael Freeman

Vice President, Product Development and Testing

GSL, Inc.

4129 South 72nd E. Avenue

Tulsa, Oklahoma 74145

Re: SNAP Submission Completeness Determination for FirebaneTM 1170; FirebaneTM 1179

Dear Mr. Freeman:

Thank you for your submission to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s)

Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. GSL’s submission has been reviewed for 

completeness as part of the initial SNAP review, and information relevant to your substitutes is 

summarized below.

Here is a summary of information concerning your submission:

Names of substitutes: FirebaneTM 1170 and FirebaneTM 1179

Substance(s) the substitutes will replace: Halon 1211 

Sector: Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection

End-uses: Streaming

Date received: January 20, 2011

Date most recent information received: April 6, 2011

Status of submission: Complete

Date 90-day review began: April 6, 2011
Your submission was complete as of April 6, 2011. EPA has 90 days from this date to 

render a decision concerning the substitute’s acceptability in the specified end-use. Pending 

EPA’s decision FirebaneTM 1170 and FirebaneTM 1179 may be sold in the specific end-use listed 

above as of July 5, 2011. EPA will notify you in a letter of our preliminary determination. 

Your submissions remain incomplete for FirebaneTM 1170 and FirebaneTM 1179 in total 

flooding. We will review that end use separately once you provide the information requested in 

my letter dated March 15, 2011. If you have questions about your submission, please contact me 

at (202) 343-9005.

Sincerely,

Nathaniel Jutras

Alternatives and Emissions Reduction Branch

Stratospheric Protection Division
§ 367.4370 Account 437, Dividends declared—preferred stock. ( a ) This account must include amounts declared payable out of retained earnings as dividends on actually outstanding preferred or prior lien capital stock issued by the service company.
( b ) Dividends must be segregated for each class and series of preferred stock as to those payable in cash, stock, and other forms. If not payable in cash, the medium of payment must be described with sufficient detail to identify it.
**EXHIBIT 31.1****SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**I, William H. Wilcox, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of United SurgicalPartners International, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect tothe period covered by this report;  3. [Intentionally omitted]  4. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internalcontrol over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the Registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, orcaused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the Registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this reportis being prepared;  b) Designed such internal control over financialreporting, or caused such internal control overfinancial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assuranceregarding the reliability of financial reporting andthe preparation of financial statements for externalpurposes in accordance with generally acceptedaccounting principles;  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented inthis report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in theRegistrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the Registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the Registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the Registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 5. The Registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of theRegistrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknessesin the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significantrole in the Registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting./s/ William H. Wilcox—————————
#### § 14.8 Investigation and examination.

A Federal agency may request any other Federal agency to investigate a claim filed under section 2672, title 28, U.S. Code, or to conduct a physical examination of a claimant and provide a report of the physical examination. Compliance with such requests may be conditioned by a Federal agency upon reimbursement by the requesting agency of the expense of investigation or examination where reimbursement is authorized, as well as where it is required, by statute or regulation.