alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 30.711 How are payments for outpatient medical services determined? ( a ) OWCP will pay for outpatient medical services according to Ambulatory Payment Classifications (APC) based on the Outpatient Prospective Payment System devised by CMS.
( b ) All outpatient medical services will be classified according to the APC prescribed by CMS for that service in the form of the Outpatient Prospective Payment System Grouper software program. Each payment is derived by multiplying the prospectively established scaled relative weight for the service's clinical APC by a conversion factor to arrive at a national unadjusted payment rate for the APC. The labor portion of the national unadjusted payment rate is further adjusted by the hospital wage index for the area where payment is being made.
( c ) If a payable service has no assigned APC, the payment will be derived from the OWCP Medical Fee Schedule.
( d ) OWCP shall review the pre-determined outpatient hospital rates at least once a year, and may adjust any or all components when OWCP deems it necessary or appropriate.
[84 FR 3056, Feb. 8, 2019]
§ 216.61 Who is eligible for an annuity as a widow(er). ( a ) A widow(er) of an employee who has completed 10 years of railroad service and had a current connection with the railroad industry at death is eligible for an annuity if he or she: ( 1 ) Has not remarried; and either
( 2 ) Has attained retirement age;
( 3 ) Is at least 50 but less than 60 years of age and became disabled as defined in part 220 of this chapter before the end of the period described in § 216.68 (this results in a reduced annuity);
( 4 ) Is less than retirement age but has in his or her care a child who either is under age 18 (16 with respect to the tier I component) or is disabled and who is entitled to an annuity under subpart H of this part; or
( 5 ) Is at least 60 years of age but has not attained retirement age. (In this case, all components of the annuity are reduced for each month the widow(er) is age 62 or over but under retirement age when the annuity begins. For each month the widow(er) is at least age 60 but under age 62, all components of the annuity are reduced as if the widow(er) were age 62).
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE>       5
<MULTIPLIER>    1,000,000
       
<S>                                                 <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                      JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                        JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                             6-MOS
<CASH>                                                  113,000
<SECURITIES>                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                         2,499,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                            212,000
<INVENTORY>                                                   0<F1>
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      3,169,000
<PP&E>                                               29,796,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       17,720,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       17,019,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 5,176,000
<BONDS>                                               5,409,000
<COMMON>                                                      1
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                                            2,110,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         17,019,000
<SALES>                                                       0<F2>
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      4,927,000
<CGS>                                                         0<F3>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         1,876,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      1,475,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        149,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      209,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (1,065,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                          (317,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   (748,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                               0
<CHANGES>                                               322,000
<NET-INCOME>                                          (426,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 0
<FN>
<F1> THIS AMOUNT IS IMMATERIAL.
<F2> NET SALES OF TANGIBLE PRODUCTS IS NOT MORE THAN 10% OF TOTAL OPERATING
REVENUES AND THEREFORE HAS NOT BEEN STATED SEPARATELY IN THE FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS PURSUANT TO REGULATION S-X, RULE 5-03(B).  THIS AMOUNT IS INCLUDED IN
THE "TOTAL REVENUES" TAG.
<F3>COST OF INTANGIBLE GOODS SOLD IS INCLUDED IN COST OF SERVICES AND PRODUCTS
IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND THE "TOTAL COST" TAG, PURSUANT TO REGULATION 
2-X, RULE 5-03 (B).
</FN>

        


</TABLE>
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 9, 2015

No. 04

- 15

- 00556

- CV

IN RE David Allan EDWARDS

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

On September 3, 2015

, relator David Allan Edwards filed a pro se petition for writ of

mandamus. The court has considered relator’s petition and is of the opinion that relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of manda mus is DENIED. See

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a). The court’s opinion will issue at a later date.

It is so ORDERED on September 9, 2015

.

_______________________________ __ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

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

court on this 9th day of September, 2015

.

__________________________ _________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 12

- 02

- 0185

- CVA, styled David Allan Edwards v. County Court of Commissioners of Atascosa County, Texas , pending in the 81st Judicial District Court, Atascosa County, Texas, the Honorable Thomas F. Lee presiding.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Virgil SMITH, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-1771.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Submitted July 19, 2006.

Decided Aug. 3, 2006.

Dean R. Lanter, Office of the United States Attorney, Hammond, IN, for Appellee.

Thomas N. O’Malley, Indiana Federal Community Defenders, Inc., Fort Wayne, IN, for Appellant.

Before Hon. KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge, Hon. DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge, Hon. TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

In *United States v. Smith,*415 F.3d 682 (7th Cir.2005), we affirmed Virgil Smith’s conviction of one count of aiding and abetting an armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, and one count of aiding and abetting in the use of a firearm, during and in relation to a bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. In so doing, we found that the district court violated Smith’s right to a speedy trial as guaranteed by the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, but that the violation was harmless. *Smith,*415 F.3d at 686. After a limited remand in accordance with *United States v. Paladino,*401 F.3d 471, 483-84 (7th Cir.2005), we affirmed Smith’s 221-month sentence as well. *United States v. Smith,*182 Fed.Appx. 586 (7th Cir.2006) (unpublished order).

Smith filed a petition for *certiorari.*The Supreme Court granted his petition, vacating our judgment and remanding Smith’s case back to us for further consideration in light of *Zedner v. United States,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 1976, 164 L.Ed.2d 749 (2006), which holds that “harmless-*505error review is not appropriate” in the Speedy Trial Act context, *id.*at 1990. *Smith v. United States,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 2859, 165 L.Ed.2d 892 (2006). Although *Zedner*was concerned with an “ends of justice” extension of the time for trial, granted under § 3161(h)(8), and Smith’s case concerns the question whether a motion was “actually under advisement by the court,” for purposes of § 3161(h)(l)(J), we see no principled difference between the two for purposes of harmless error review. The language of the Speedy Trial Act is just as mandatory for one subsection of § 3161(h) as it is for the others, and there is nothing in the Act that suggests that the command of § 3161(c) setting forth the time in which trial “shall” begin depends on which exception is invoked.

In accordance with Circuit Rule 54, we requested that both parties file position statements as to what action we ought to take on remand. Both parties take the position that Zedner’s holding controls Smith’s case too, and that Smith’s conviction should be reversed and his sentence vacated. We agree. All that remains is to remand this case to the district court to determine, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3162(a)(2), whether to dismiss Smith’s case with or without prejudice.

Accordingly, we Reverse Smith’s conviction, Vacate his sentence, and Remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this order.
§ 234.56 Persons to whom a separation allowance lump-sum payment is payable. ( a ) An employee who has completed 10 years of service at the time of his or her retirement or death and who has received on or after January 1, 1985, a separation allowance or severance payment (see § 210.11 of this chapter) which would have been used to increase his or her tier II benefit, except for the fact that he or she was neither in an employment relation to one or more employers as defined in part 204 of this chapter nor an employee representative (see part 205 of this chapter), shall be entitled to a lump sum in the amount provided for in § 234.58.
( b ) If an employee, otherwise eligible for the lump sum provided for in this section, dies before he or she becomes entitled to a regular annuity or before he or she receives payment of the lump sum, the lump sum is payable to the employee's widow or widower who will not have died before receiving payment. If the employee is not survived by a widow or widower who will not have died before receiving payment, the lump sum is payable to the employee's survivors in the same order of priority as shown for the residual lump-sum (RLS) in § 234.44.
iit: ? p .ek.


# State of New Mexico

Susana Martinez Governor
May 6, 2014

Ms. Gina McCarthy, Administrator United States Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Ariel Rios Building, Room 300 Washington, DC 20460
Dear Ms. McCarthy: I am writing to ask for your consideration in granting a partial waiver from the R p newable Fuel Standard (RFS) mandate. As you know, the nation is suffering from the , effects of a severe, multiyear drought. This prolonged drought is having a direct impact on all sedtors of the economy and is afflicting consumers through increased food prices. The impacts of drought will continue to impinge on the United States and New Mexico farmers and producers. This year we, are faced with another challenge created by RFS. V"Jhile renewable fuel requirements are increasing annually, gasoline demand in the United States is steadily declining. This dynamic has created the E10 blend wall -- the point at which more renewable fuel is required to be blended than can be safely consumed in the United States due to vehicle compatibility and fuel suppiy infrastructure limitations. The effects of the E10 blend wall could lead to a"regulatory stiortage" of available gasolinF in the United States. I recognize that you have acknowiedged the blend wall and exercised your authority in the pronosed 2014 Rt = S volumes rule by wdiving the vo9umes to just below 10 percent ethanol. I strongly encourage you to stay the course and remain steadfast in your resolve to avoid the blend wall and unnecessary economic harm as you finalize the 2014 RF S volumes.

State Capitol • Room q.00 • Santa Fe, New Mexico 8 75 01 • 505-476-2200 • fax: 505-476-2226

### Ms. Gina McCarthy

May 6, 2014 Page 2 Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely,

Susana Martinez Governor
ATTACHMENT HEADER SHEET

Attachment Number 009

Attachment Name

Attachment 9 CaCoPbTiWO Process Flow

Associated PMN Section Number

Pt.2, Sec.A, 1d. (#2)

Does not contain CBI

Report Number

coNSi 10317786855351
00

00x0U

6O u

0/ I

zC

I C d

od 0

66 -c ot

51

4- 1 - jcz

0 0

0 O P. C',~ 0-4-

0

00

u cn

00 0 0- 

0 U~ 0

to AI

5b Z 

0~ (U

S 00C14
tr0

0

000

000

00 ~0 o 0

1-4' 

c j

0 >> 0 cd

C) M 0 E

0 0 '

(;n COO

0

, 0 CD

-155

c (U

0

o 0 -E 

00 0

* n 0 . 000

0 X

-P- 0 *--

0 4 S j

4m 0 

CC

UU

0o 0

*b t
00

00

C)

z

I

0

cJcl

c. raj

oq >0 / o

CL 9. 0 Q)

= in : . t

U) U) cq

0 0 0 ,

UC
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 24,710

 25,661

 27,042

 27,104

 26,810

 27,275

 27,215

 25,322

 25,095

 23,843

 22,757

 21,971

 21,398

 21,372

 18,264

 17,607

 25,566

 25,914

 25,448

 24,889

 25,192

 25,633

 24,760

 23,447

 22,354

 21,929

 23,386

 25,877

 25,130

 26,118

 14,177

 13,457

 12,967

 12,921

 12,094

 12,426

 13,579

 11,910

 12,611

 12,414

 12,195

 12,786

 12,418

 12,495

 11,825

 11,584

 17,514

 12,242

 11,478

 10,911

 11,534

 12,301

 12,108

 12,131

 12,285

 12,906

 13,522

 14,122

 13,959

 13,146

 18,736

 18,635

 19,126

 19,349

 19,488

 19,774

 19,292

 18,390

 18,336

 17,845

 17,056

 17,250

 17,316

 16,309

 14,840

 14,837

 21,000

 18,710

 17,309

 18,386

 18,546

 18,711

 18,059

 17,425

 17,338

 17,863

 18,730

 19,758

 19,245

 19,614

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

SEPTEMBER 2007 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: October 10, 2007

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PORT CHICAGO BOTTOM IN SUISUN BAY
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20942-20943]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9095]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Humboldt (NV) Resource Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Humboldt (NV) Resource Advisory Committee will meet in 
Winnemucca, Nevada. The committee is meeting as authorized under the 
Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (Pub. L. 110-
343) and in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The 
purpose is to hold the first meeting of the newly formed committee.

DATES: The meeting will be held May 21, 2011 from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Humboldt County Court House 
Room 201, 50 West 5th Street, Winnemucca, Nevada. Written comments 
should be sent to USDA Forest Service, 1500 E. Winnemucca Blvd., 
Winnemucca, NV 89445. Comments may also be sent via e-mail to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7e0d141710190c1f133e180d50181b1a500b0d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="aad9c0c3c4cdd8cbc7eaccd984cccfce84dfd9">[email protected]</span></a>, or via facsimile to 775-625-1200.
    All comments, including names and addresses when provided, are 
placed in the record and are available for public inspection and 
copying. The public may inspect comments received at http://fs.usda.gov/goto/htnf/rac.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shonna Ingram, RAC Coordinator, Santa 
Rosa Ranger District Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest, 775-623-5025 Ext 
117.
    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through 
Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting is open to the public. The 
following business will be conducted: (1) Introductions of all 
committee members and Forest Service personnel; (2) orientation to the 
process of considering and recommending Title II projects; (3) 
committee members to select a chairperson; (4) committee members to 
establish RAC operating guidelines; and (5) public Comment. Persons who 
wish to bring related matters to the attention of the Committee may 
file written statements with the Committee staff before or after the 
meeting. Public input sessions will be provided and individuals who 
made written requests by May 13, 2011 will have the opportunity to 
address the Committee at those sessions.


[[Page 20943]]


    Dated: April 6, 2011.
Jeanne M. Higgins,
Forest Supervisor, Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest.
[FR Doc. 2011-9095 Filed 4-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 13

- 00341

- CV

JOHNNY PARTAIN v. CONTABLE J. E. 'EDDIE' GUERRA, HIDALGO COUNTY PRECINCT 4 IN HIS

OFFICIAL CAPACITY AND JAMES H. MAPLES, ET AL.

On Appeal from the 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County , Texas Trial Cau se No. C

- 0929

- 12

- F

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes the judgment of the trial court should be REVERSED and the cause
REMANDED to the trial court . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with its opinion . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appell ee

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. July 2, 2015
Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Thomas Viertel, Chief Financial Officer of Presidential Realty Corporation
(the "Company") certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the Company;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any
   untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
   necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
   under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to
   the period covered by this quarterly report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
   information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all
   material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
   cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in
   this quarterly report;

4. The Company's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
   establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
   defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
   Company and we have:

     a)    designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
           material information relating to the Company, including its
           consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
           entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly
           report is being prepared;

     b)    evaluated the effectiveness of the Company's disclosure controls and
           procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
           effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the
           end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
           and

     c)    disclosed in this report any changes in the Company's internal
           control over financial reporting that occurred during the Company's
           most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is
           reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company's internal
           control over financial reporting; and

5. The Company's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
   most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
   the Company's auditors and the Audit Committee of the Company's Board of
   Directors:

     a)   all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
          operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
          reasonably likely to adversely affect the Company's ability to record,
          process, summarize and report financial information; and

     b)   any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the Company's internal
          control over financial reporting.


  DATE:  August 8, 2007           By: /s/ Thomas Viertel
                                      --------------------------
                                      Thomas Viertel
                                      Chief Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

JAMES G. WAITE

v.

CDG PROPERTIES, LLC

v.

LEZZER HOLDINGS, INC., GRANDVIEW MANAGEMENT, INC. AND BURNHAM FARMS, LP., STONE VALLEY CONSTRUCTION, INC., AND COUNTRY

COVE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION

PETITION OF: GRANDVIEW MANAGEMENT, INC. AND BURNHAM FARMS, LP. :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 295 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 17th day of October, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.