alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 641.575 May a grantee or sub-recipient establish a limit on the amount of time its participants may spend at a host agency?

Yes, grantees and sub-recipients may establish limits on the amount of time that participants spend at a particular host agency, and are encouraged to rotate participants among different host agencies, or to different assignments within the same host agency, as such rotations may increase participants' skills development and employment opportunities. Such limits must be established in the grant agreement or modification of the grant, and approved by the Department. The Department will not approve any limit that does not require an individualized determination that rotation is in the best interest of the participant and will further the acquisition of skills listed in the IEP. Host agency rotations have no effect on either the individual participation limit or the average participation cap.
§ 725.212 Conditions of entitlement; surviving spouse or surviving divorced spouse. ( a ) An individual who is the surviving spouse or surviving divorced spouse of a miner is eligible for benefits if such individual: ( 1 ) Is not married;
( 2 ) Was dependent on the miner at the pertinent time; and
( 3 ) The deceased miner either: ( i ) Is determined to have died due to pneumoconiosis; or
( ii ) Filed a claim for benefits on or after January 1, 1982, which results or resulted in a final award of benefits, and the surviving spouse or surviving divorced spouse filed a claim for benefits after January 1, 2005 which was pending on or after March 23, 2010.
( b ) If more than one spouse meets the conditions of entitlement prescribed in paragraph (a), then each spouse will be considered a beneficiary for purposes of section 412(a)(2) of the Act without regard to the existence of any other entitled spouse or spouses.
[65 FR 80054, Dec. 20, 2000, as amended at 78 FR 59117, Sept. 25, 2013]
<PAGE>   1



                                                                    EXHIBIT 24.2

                             COMSHARE, INCORPORATED

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


         KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each of the undersigned
constitutes and appoints Dennis G. Ganster, Kathryn A. Jehle and Michael S.
Khoury, and each of them, his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, with
full power of substitution, and resubstitution for him and in his name, place
and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign a certain Registration Statement
on Form S-8 to be filed by Comshare, Incorporated relating to the Comshare,
Incorporated Directors' Stock Option Plan and any and all amendments thereto,
and to file the same with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto
such attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power and authority to
do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done
in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or
could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that such
attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them, or their or his substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.


Dated: 12/22, 1999                     /s/ Dennis G. Ganster
                                       --------------------------------------
                                       Dennis G. Ganster, Director, President
                                       and Chief Executive Officer
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4511 

To amend the Veterans’ Oral History Project Act to allow the collection 

of video and audio recordings of biographical histories by immediate 

family members of members of the Armed Forces who died as a result 

of their service during a period of war. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2016 

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself, Ms. JENKINS of Kansas, and Mr. 

MACARTHUR) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To amend the Veterans’ Oral History Project Act to allow 

the collection of video and audio recordings of biographical histories by immediate family members of members 

of the Armed Forces who died as a result of their service 

during a period of war. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Gold Star Families 

5 Voices Act’’. 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4511 IH

1 SEC. 2. COLLECTION OF VIDEO AND AUDIO RECORDINGS 

2 OF BIOGRAPHICAL HISTORIES BY IMME3 DIATE FAMILY MEMBERS OF MEMBERS OF 

4 THE ARMED FORCES WHO DIED AS A RESULT 

5 OF THEIR SERVICE DURING A PERIOD OF 

6 WAR. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 3(a) of 

8 the Veterans’ Oral History Project Act (20 U.S.C. 

9 2142(a)(1)) is amended to read as follows: 

10 ‘‘(1) to collect video and audio recordings of— 

11 ‘‘(A) personal histories and testimonials of 

12 veterans of the Armed Forces who served dur13 ing a period of war; and 

14 ‘‘(B) biographical histories by immediate 

15 family members of members of the Armed 

16 Forces who became missing in action or died as 

17 a result of their service during a period of 

18 war;’’. 

19 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 3 of the 

20 Veterans’ Oral History Project Act (20 U.S.C. 2142) is 

21 further amended by adding at the end the following new 

22 subsection: 

23 ‘‘(d) DEFINITION OF IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEM24 BER.—For purposes of subsection (a), the term ‘immeVerDate Sep 11 2014 06:52 Feb 10, 2016 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H4511.IH H4511

smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4511 IH

1 diate family member’ means a parent, spouse, sibling, or 

2 child.’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
§ 725.701 What medical benefits are available? ( a ) A miner who is determined to be eligible for benefits under this part or part 727 of this subchapter (*see* § 725.4(d)) is entitled to medical benefits as set forth in this subpart as of the date of his or her claim, but in no event before January 1, 1974. Medical benefits may not be provided to the survivor or dependent of a miner under this part.
( b ) A responsible operator, or where there is none, the fund, must furnish a miner entitled to benefits under this part with such medical services and treatments (including professional medical services and medical equipment, prescription drugs, outpatient medical services, inpatient medical services, and any other medical service, treatment or supply) for such periods as the nature of the miner's pneumoconiosis and disability requires.
( c ) The medical benefits referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section include palliative measures useful only to prevent pain or discomfort associated with the miner's pneumoconiosis or attendant disability.
( d ) An operator or the fund must also pay the miner's reasonable cost of travel necessary for medical treatment (to be determined in accordance with prevailing United States government mileage rates) and the reasonable documented cost to the miner or medical provider incurred in communicating with the operator, carrier, or OWCP on matters connected with medical benefits.
( e ) ( 1 ) If a miner receives a medical service or treatment, as described in this section, for any pulmonary disorder, there will be a rebuttable presumption that the disorder is caused or aggravated by the miner's pneumoconiosis.
( 2 ) The party liable for the payment of benefits may rebut the presumption by producing credible evidence that the medical service or treatment provided was for a pulmonary disorder apart from those previously associated with the miner's disability, or was beyond that necessary to effectively treat a covered disorder, or was not for a pulmonary disorder at all.
( 3 ) An operator or the fund, however, cannot rely on evidence that the miner does not have pneumoconiosis or is not totally disabled by pneumoconiosis arising out of coal mine employment to defeat a request for coverage of any medical service or treatment under this subpart.
( 4 ) In determining whether the treatment is compensable, the opinion of the miner's treating physician may be entitled to controlling weight pursuant to § 718.104(d) of this subchapter.
( 5 ) A finding that a medical service or treatment is not covered under this subpart will not otherwise affect the miner's entitlement to benefits.
### §290m–4. Authority to agree to certain amendments to the Border Environment Cooperation Agreement

The President may agree to amendments to the Cooperation Agreement that—

(1) enable the Bank to make grants and nonmarket rate loans out of its paid-in capital resources with the approval of its Board; and

(2) amend the definition of "border region" to include the area in the United States that is within 100 kilometers of the international boundary between the United States and Mexico, and the area in Mexico that is within 300 kilometers of the international boundary between the United States and Mexico.

(Pub. L. 103–182, title V, §545, as added Pub. L. 108–215, §1(a), Apr. 5, 2004, 118 Stat. 579; amended Pub. L. 116–113, title VI, §601, Jan. 29, 2020, 134 Stat. 78; Pub. L. 116–260, div. O, title VI, §601(a)(1), (2), Dec. 27, 2020, 134 Stat. 2149.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2020—Pub. L. 116–260, §601(a)(1), (2), provided that section 601 of Pub. L. 116–113 does not apply to this section and revived the provisions of this section as if such section 601 had not been enacted. See below.

Pub. L. 116–113, §601, which repealed this section effective on the date the USMCA entered into force (July 1, 2020), was made inapplicable to this section by section 601(a)(1), (2) of Pub. L. 116–260.

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

#### Effective Date of 2020 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 116–260 effective July 1, 2020, see section 601(h) of div. O of Pub. L. 116–260, set out as a note under section 81c of Title 19, Customs Duties.
§ 725.459 Witness fees. ( a ) A witness testifying at a hearing before an administrative law judge, or whose deposition is taken, shall receive the same fees and mileage as witnesses in courts of the United States. If the witness is an expert, he or she shall be entitled to an expert witness fee. Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, such fees shall be paid by the proponent of the witness.
( b ) If the witness' proponent does not intend to call the witness to appear at a hearing or deposition, any other party may subpoena the witness for cross-examination. The administrative law judge (ALJ) shall authorize the least intrusive and expensive means of cross-examination as the ALJ deems appropriate and necessary to the full and true disclosure of the facts. If such witness is required to attend the hearing, give a deposition or respond to interrogatories for cross-examination purposes, the proponent of the witness shall pay the witness' fee. The fund shall remain liable for any costs associated with the cross-examination of the physician who performed the complete pulmonary evaluation pursuant to § 725.406.
( c ) If a claimant is determined entitled to benefits, there may be assessed as costs against a responsible operator, if any, or the fund, fees and mileage for necessary witnesses attending the hearing at the request of the claimant. Both the necessity for the witness and the reasonableness of the fees of any expert witness shall be approved by the administrative law judge. The amounts awarded against a responsible operator or the fund as attorney's fees, or costs, fees and mileage for witnesses, shall not in any respect affect or diminish benefits payable under the Act.
[65 FR 80054, Dec. 20, 2000, as amended at 68 FR 69935, Dec. 15, 2003]
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

 2,353

 3,495

 3,020

 3,307

 2,185

 2,646

 2,985

 2,074

 4,350

 2,366

 2,178

 2,251

 2,693

 2,423

 2,333

 2,852

 2,957

 3,063

 2,840

 2,023

 3,007

 2,973

 3,083

 2,718

 2,934

 2,314

 2,239

 2,836

 2,182

 2,317

 50,128

 49,857

 50,685

 51,019

 51,610

 51,105

 51,064

 51,346

 50,749

 52,344

 51,975

 51,445

 51,011

 51,019

 50,770

 50,448

 50,635

 50,912

 51,276

 51,411

 50,762

 51,081

 51,351

 51,712

 51,709

 51,911

 51,513

 51,065

 51,206

 50,718

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

SEPTEMBER 2020 SHASTA LAKE FLOOD CONTROL REQUIREMENTS RUN DATE: November 4, 2020

 52,481

 53,352

 53,705

 54,326

 53,795

 53,751

 54,049

 53,420

 55,099

 54,710

 54,153

 53,696

 53,704

 53,442

 53,103

 53,300

 53,592

 53,975

 54,116

 53,434

 53,769

 54,054

 54,434

 54,430

 54,643

 54,225

 53,752

 53,901

 53,388

 53,035

 5,170,000

 5,149,000

 5,127,000

 5,106,000

 5,085,000

 5,063,000

 5,042,000

 5,021,000

 5,000,000

 4,978,000

 4,957,000

 4,936,000

 4,914,000

 4,893,000

 4,872,000

 4,850,000

 4,829,000

 4,808,000

 4,786,000

 4,765,000

 4,744,000

 4,722,000

 4,701,000

 4,680,000

 4,659,000

 4,637,000

 4,616,000

 4,595,000

 4,573,000

 4,552,000

 SHASTA

 INFLOW 

C. F. S. 

 PREV DAY

 F. C. PAR 

 (COL 3) 

 X .95 

 F. C. 

 PARAM 

 (COLS. 

 1 + 2 ) 

 .0356* 

 X DAYS 

 12/23 THRU

3/20 

 530,000

 MINUS 

 F. C. 

 PARAM

 (COL 3)

 COLS 

 4 X 5 

 F. C. 

 RESERV 

 (1,300,000 

 - COL 6 ) 

 MINUS 

 14,943 

 PER DAY 

 AFTER 

 3/20 

 ADJUSTED 

 F. C. 

 RESERV 

 (7-8) 

 PERM 

 STORAGE 

 COMMENTS:

 * LEAP YEAR CONSTANT = .0352 

 CONSTANT .0356 = 1,300,000 / (TOTAL DAYS X (530,000 - 110,000 ) )

 IF COL 3 IS GREATER THAN 530,000 OR LESS THAN 110,000 USE THOSE VALUES FOR COL 3 INSTEAD OF THE COMPUTED VALUE. 

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 

 52,767
#### Hyman Bernstein, Individually and as President of Bakery and Pastry Drivers Union, Local 802, American Federation of Labor, et al., Respondents, v. Madison Baking Co., Inc., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.

Ho opinion. Present—Martin, P. J., Townley, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.
cc: Hon. Scott N. Freeman, District Judge 

James Kevin Mack, Sr. 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Washoe County District Attorney 

Washoe District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2
FORM 6-K
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                        Report of Foreign Private Issuer

                        Pursuant to Rule 13a-16 or 15d-16
                     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934




For the month of June 2005
Commission File Number 333-7182-01

                                   CEZ, a. s.

      ---------------------------------------------------------------------
                 (Translation of registrant's name into English)
                                c/o Duhova 2/1444
                                 140 53 Prague 4
                                 Czech Republic

      ---------------------------------------------------------------------
                    (Address of principal executive offices)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports
under cover Form 20-F or Form 40-F.

                     Form 20-F [ X ]         Form 40-F [ ]

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as
permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1): [ ]

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as
permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7): [ ]

Indicate by check mark whether by furnishing the information contained in this
Form, the registrant is also thereby furnishing the information to the
Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

                                Yes [ ]         No [ X ]

If "Yes" is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in
connection with Rule 12g3-2(b): 82-
                                    --------

<PAGE>
In connection with filing Form 12b-25 with respect to our Annual Report on Form
20-F for fiscal year 2004, we are furnishing the following documents as exhibits
to this Form 6-K:


99.1    Audited consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with
        International Financial Reporting Standards

99.2    Draft of Form 20-F (a substantially completed draft omitting U.S.
        Generally Accepted Accounting Principles reconciliation, Item 18 and
        exhibits)

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.



                                                         CEZ, a. s.
                                                --------------------------
                                                        (Registrant)

Date:  June 30, 2005
                                                By:  /s/ Libuse Latalova
                                                     --------------------
                                                     Libuse Latalova
                                                Head of Finance Administration
#### Larriante SUMBRY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. GARY CITY POLICE; Cecil Davis, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 05-30242.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 23, 2006.

Larriante Sumbry, Michigan City, IN, pro se.

*242Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Larriante Sumbry, Indiana prisoner # 965137, appeals the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition which the district court construed as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Sumbry does not set forth argument citing to the record and fails to identify error in the district court’s determinations and conclusions. When an appellant fails to identify error in the district court’s decision, it is as if the appellant had not appealed that judgment. *See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner,*813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987). Sumbry’s appeal is therefore DISMISSED as frivolous. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2; *Howard v. King,*707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983).

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
§ 725.711 How are payments for inpatient medical services determined? ( a ) ( 1 ) OWCP pays for inpatient medical services according to predetermined rates derived from the Medicare Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) used by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for the Medicare program (42 CFR part 412).
( 2 ) Inpatient hospital discharges are classified into diagnosis-related groups (DRGs). Each DRG groups together clinically similar conditions that require comparable amounts of inpatient resources. For each DRG, an appropriate weighting factor is assigned that reflects the estimated relative cost of hospital resources used with respect to discharges classified within that group compared to discharges classified within other groups.
( 3 ) For each hospital discharge classified within a DRG, a payment amount for that discharge is determined by using the national weighting factor determined for that DRG, national standardized adjustments, and other factors which may vary by hospital, such as an adjustment for area wage levels. OWCP may also use other price adjustment factors as appropriate based on its processing experience and internal data.
( b ) If an inpatient service cannot be classified by DRG, occurs at a facility excluded from the Medicare IPPS, or otherwise cannot be paid at the prevailing community rate under the pricing formula described in paragraph (a) of this section, OWCP may pay for the service based on fee schedules or other pricing formulas utilized by OWCP for inpatient services.
§ 686.470 May an individual who is determined to be ineligible or an individual who is denied enrollment appeal that decision? ( a ) A person who is determined to be ineligible to participate in Job Corps under § 686.400 or a person who is not selected for enrollment under § 686.410 may appeal the determination to the outreach and admissions agency within 60 days of the determination. The appeal will be resolved according to the procedures in §§ 686.960 and 686.965. If the appeal is denied by the outreach/admissions contractor or the center, the person may appeal the decision in writing to the Regional Director within 60 days of the date of the denial. The Regional Director will decide within 60 days whether to reverse or approve the appealed decision. The decision by the Regional Director is the Department's final decision.
( b ) If an applicant believes that he or she has been determined ineligible or not selected for enrollment based upon a factor prohibited by sec. 188 of WIOA, the individual may proceed under the applicable Department nondiscrimination regulations implementing WIOA sec. 188 at 29 CFR part 38.
( c ) An applicant who is determined to be ineligible or a person who is denied enrollment must be referred to the appropriate one-stop center or other local service provider.
Exhibit 32.2



                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

                                18 U.S.C.  1350,

                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report  of RF  Industries,  Ltd.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended  January 31, 2005, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"),  I, William T. Gochnauer,
Acting Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to the best of my knowledge:

(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:   March 16, 2005                            /s/ William T. Gochnauer
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  William T. Gochnauer
                                                  Acting Chief Financial Officer

A signed  original  of this  written  statement  required  by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to RF Industries,  Ltd. and will be
retained by RF  Industries,  Ltd. and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.