alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 159 (Friday, October 8, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 60350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22649]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Foreign Agricultural Service


Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers

AGENCY: Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), re-certified 
the trade adjustment assistance (TAA) petition that was filed by the 
United Fishermen of Alaska on behalf of Alaska salmon fishermen and 
initially certified on November 6, 2003. Salmon fishermen holding 
permits and licenses in the State of Alaska will be eligible to apply 
for fiscal year 2005 benefits during a 90-day period beginning on 
October 15, 2004. The application period closes on January 13, 2005.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Upon investigation, the Administrator 
determined that continued increases in imports of farmed salmon 
contributed importantly to a decline in the average landed price of 
salmon in Alaska by 35.2 percent during the 2003 marketing period 
(January-December 2003), compared to the 1997-2001 base period. 
Eligible producers may request technical assistance from the Extension 
Service at no cost and receive an adjustment assistance payment, if 
certain program criteria are satisfied.
    Producers of raw agricultural commodities wishing to learn more 
about TAA and how they may apply should contact the Department of 
Agriculture at the addresses provided below for General Information.
    Producers Certified as Eligible for TAA, Contact: Farm Service 
Agency service centers.
    For General Information About TAA, Contact: Jean-Louis Pajot, 
Coordinator, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers, FAS, USDA, (202) 
720-2916, email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b7c3c5d6d3d299d6d3ddc2c4c3dad2d9c3f7d1d6c499c2c4d3d699d0d8c1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a9dddbc8cdcc87c8cdc3dcdaddc4ccc7dde9cfc8da87dcdacdc887cec6df">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: September 23, 2004.
A. Ellen Terpstra,
Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service.
[FR Doc. 04-22649 Filed 10-7-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-10-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-31141 Summary Calendar

HOWARD NOLAN CHISHOLM, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, on behalf of Overton Brooks Medical Center Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 96-CV-1421

- - - - - - - - - - April 22, 1997 Before KING, JOLLY, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Howard N. Chisholm, Jr., appeals the dismissal of his suit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b). Chisholm contends that the statute of limitations did not bar his suit because his administrative tort claim was filed within two years of the time he became aware of the factual predicate for a possible medical malpractice claim. We haveNo. 96-31141 - 2 - reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties and AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal for essentially the same reasons adopted by the district court. Chisholm v. United States , No. 96-CV-1421 (W.D. La. Oct. 22, 1996).
AFFIRMED.
### §713a. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 98–165, §3, Nov. 22, 1983, 97 Stat. 1064, which related to consideration of Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community as one tribe, was omitted from the Code as being of special and not general application.
#### § 418.11 Valid headgate deliveries.

The valid water deliveries at the headgate are set by the product of eligible land actually irrigated multiplied by the appropriate water duty in accordance with §§ 418.8 and 418.10. The District will regularly monitor all water deliveries and report in accordance with § 418.9. No amount of water will be delivered in excess of the individual water user's headgate entitlement. In the event excess deliveries should occur, such amount will be automatically reflected in the efficiency deficit adjustment to the Lahontan storage. Water delivered in excess of entitlements must not be considered valid for purposes of computing project efficiency.
§ 4.414 Answers. ( a ) Any person served with a notice of appeal who wishes to participate in the appeal must file an answer or appropriate motion with the Board within 30 days after service of the statement of reasons for appeal. The answer must respond to the statement of reasons for appeal.
( b ) Unless the Board orders otherwise upon motion for good cause shown: ( 1 ) The text of the answer or motion may not exceed 30 pages, excluding exhibits, declarations, or other attachments; and
( 2 ) The party may not file any further pleading.
( c ) Failure to file an answer or motion will not result in a default. If an answer or motion is filed or served after the time required, the Board may disregard it in deciding the appeal, unless the delay in filing is waived as provided in § 4.401(a).
( d ) The requirements of § 4.401(d) apply to an answer or motion.
[75 FR 64666, Oct. 20, 2010]
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18

- 1570 V

Filed: October 21, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

KATHLEEN BARTHOLOMEW

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;
Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine
Administration (SIRVA)

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA , for petitioner.

Traci R. Patton , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Corcoran

, Chief Special Master:

On October 10, 2018

, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. , 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ( “ SIRVA ” ) as a result of an influenza vaccination administered on
October 3, 2016 . Petit ion at 1 . The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit

of the Office of Special Masters.

1 I intend to post this decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. This means the
decision will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other informati on, the disclosure of
which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified
material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access. Because this unpublished

decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United

States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

- Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. §
3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electroni c Government Services)

.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012 ).2

On October 21, 2019

, respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, respondent “ concluded that petitioner ’ s alleged injury is consi stent with SIRVA, as defined on the Vaccine Injury Table. ” Id. at 4 . Respondent further agrees that “ petitioner had no history of pain , inflammation or dys fu nction in her left shoulder prio r to her O ctober 2016 flu vaccination; her pa in and re duced range of motion occurred within 48 hours of receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; her symptoms were limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no

other condition o r abnormality was identified to explain her symptoms ”

. Id.

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that petitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
§ 3935.10 Accounting records. ( a ) Operators or lessees must maintain records that provide an accurate account of, or include all: ( 1 ) Oil shale mined;
( 2 ) Oil shale put through the processing plant and retort;
( 3 ) Mineral products produced and sold;
( 4 ) Shale oil products, shale gas, and shale oil by-products sold; and
( 5 ) Shale oil products and by-products that are consumed on-lease for the beneficial use of the lease.
( b ) The records must include relevant quality analyses of oil shale mined or processed and of all products including synthetic petroleum, shale oil, shale gas, and shale oil by-products sold.
( c ) Production and sale records must be made available for the BLM's examination during regular business hours.
§ 3602.42 How does BLM publicize competitive mineral materials sales? ( a ) When offering mineral materials for sale by competitive bidding, BLM: ( 1 ) Will advertise the sale by publishing a sale notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the area where the material is located, on the same day once a week for 2 consecutive weeks; and
( 2 ) Will post a sale notice in a conspicuous place in the office where you will submit bids.
( b ) In the sale notice, BLM will state: ( 1 ) By legal description, the location of the tract or tracts on which we are offering the materials;
( 2 ) The kind of materials we are offering;
( 3 ) The estimated quantities of materials we are offering;
( 4 ) The unit of measurement;
( 5 ) The appraised prices;
( 6 ) The time and place for receiving and opening of bids;
( 7 ) The minimum deposit we require;
( 8 ) If the sale is by request, the total cost recovery fee paid to BLM by the applicant up to 21 days before the sale;
( 9 ) The site access that will be available to the purchaser;
( 10 ) The method of bidding;
( 11 ) If applicable, that the purchaser must file mining or reclamation plans;
( 12 ) The bonding requirement;
( 13 ) The location for inspection of contract terms and proposed stipulations;
( 14 ) The address and telephone number of the office where you may obtain additional information;
( 15 ) Whether BLM will renew the contract; and
( 16 ) Any additional information that BLM deems necessary.
( c ) BLM may, in its discretion, extend the period of time for advertising;
( d ) BLM will not hold sales sooner than 1 week after the last advertisement.
[66 FR 58901, Nov. 23, 2001, as amended at 70 FR 58878, Oct. 7, 2005]
Exhibit A 

Case 0:20-cv-61091-WPD Document 10-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/12/2020 Page 1 of 1
#### § 3150.0-3 Authority.

The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended and supplemented, (30 U.S.C. 181 *et seq.*), the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands of 1947, as amended (30 U.S.C. 351-359), the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3101 *et seq.*), the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 *et seq.*), the Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 (31 U.S.C. 483a), the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 (42 U.S.C. 6504) and the Department of the Interior Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 1981 (42 U.S.C. 6508).
#### State of Nebraska, ex rel. Porter Donnell, relator, v. Arthur v. Offill, County Clerk, respondent.

Filed October 19, 1905.

No. 14,478.

Original application for a writ of mandamus to compel respondent to file certificate of nomination and place name of relator on election ballot.

*Writ allowed.*

*H. M. Sinclair,*for relator.

*Norris Brown, Attorney General, W. T. Thompson*and *Edwin E. Squires,*for respondent.

*Fawcett & Abbott, amid curiae.*

Per Curiam.

Writ of mandamus allowed. Opinion to be filed later.

Barnes, J., dissents.

The following opinion was filed December 6, 1905:

Sedgwick, J.

This is an original application for a mandamus against the county clerk of Buffalo county to compel him to receive and file the nomination of relator to the office of supervisor for the sixth district of said county. The county clerk refused to receive and file the certificate upon the sole ground that there could be no election of supervisor at the ensuing election, because section 1, chapter 54, laws of 1905, provides: “The supervisors selected and ap*671pointed as provided in this act shall hold their respective offices until the next general election occurring upon the even year folloAving their selections or appointment, and until their successors have been duly elected and qualified.” This act of the legislature Avould extend the terms of the county supervisors of the state for another year, and Avas held to be in conflict Avith the constitution for the reasons given in *State v. Plasters, ante,*p. 652.

Other objections Avere made to the constitutionality of the act, but it is not thought that their discussion here Avould be of permanent value.

The peremptory AVrit Avas alloAved as prayed.

Barnes, J.,

dissenting.

I dissent for the reasons given in *State v. Plasters, ante,*p. 652.
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 ELEV

 498.59

 498.72

 498.96

 499.35

 499.56

 499.45

 499.83

 499.48

 499.28

 499.14

 498.97

 498.79

 498.76

 499.33

 499.51

 499.74

 499.82

 499.85

 499.87

 499.96

 499.78

 499.95

 499.80

 499.56

 499.15

 498.87

 499.03

 499.15

 499.10

 499.05

 53,805

 53,942

 54,194

 54,609

 54,834

 54,716

 55,122

 54,748

 54,535

 54,385

 54,204

 54,015

 53,984

 54,588

 54,780

 55,026

 55,111

 55,143

 55,164

 55,260

 55,068

 55,250

 55,090

 54,834

 54,396

 54,099

 54,268

 54,396

 54,343

 54,289

STORAGE

-210

+137

+252

+415

+225

-118

+406

-374

-213

-150

-181

-189

-31

+604

+192

+246

+85

+32

+21

+96

-192

+182

-160

-256

-438

-297

+169

+128

-53

-54

CHANGE

971

1,040

1,013

991

802

526

701

175

157

192

135

130

208

531

322

349

269

240

237

274

128

317

144

97

1

75

311

292

202

197

INFLOW

 1,066

 971

 882

 780

 685

 583

 492

 360

 263

 263

 223

 223

 222

 223

 223

 224

 223

 223

 224

 224

 223

 222

 222

 223

 220

 222

 224

 225

 225

 221

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 11

 0

 4

 2

 4

 2

 4

 4

 1

 5

 3

 2

 2

 3

 2

 1

 3

 1

 2

 2

 2

 3

 3

 3

 2

 3

 2

 2

 4

 3

C.F.S.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

NOVEMBER 2015 TULLOCH RESERVOIR DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: 12/01/2015

RES.

EVAP

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS +274 11,027 10,804 0 0 85

ACRE-FEET +274 21,872 21,430 0 0 169

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 21,430

SPILL 0 21,430

 54,015

OUTLET 0

TOTAL 

NEW

MELONES

RELEASE (1)

 1,057

 1,071

 1,065

 1,065

 885

 639

 802

 238

 238

 264

 239

 239

 316

 643

 408

 479

 378

 305

 295

 324

 190

 380

 190

 107

 12

 86

 314

 289

 208

 201

 12,927

 25,641

*COMPUTED INFLOW IS SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, AND

EVAPORATION.
§ 3273.24 When may BLM terminate my site license? ( a ) BLM may terminate a site license by written order. We may terminate your site license if you: ( 1 ) Do not comply with the requirements of § 3270.11; or
( 2 ) Do not comply with the requirements of § 3200.4.
( b ) To prevent termination, you must correct the violation within 30 days after you receive a correction order from BLM, unless we determine that: ( 1 ) The violation cannot be corrected within 30 days; and
( 2 ) You are diligently attempting to correct it.
§ 30.226 Is a record made of formal probate hearings? ( a ) The judge must make a verbatim recording of all formal probate hearings. The judge will order the transcription of recordings of hearings as the judge determines necessary.
( b ) If the judge orders the transcription of a hearing, the judge will make the transcript available to interested parties on request.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO § 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Michaels Stores, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), for the period ended April 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officer’s 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:  May 26,   2011 | /s/   John B. Menzer                                              |
|--------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                 | John   B. Menzer                                                  |
|                                 | Chief   Executive Officer                                         |
|                                 | (Principal   Executive Officer)                                   |
|                                 |                                                              |
|                                 |                                                              |
|                                 | /s/   Charles M. Sonsteby                                         |
|                                 | Charles   M. Sonsteby                                             |
|                                 | Chief   Administrative Officer & Chief Financial Officer |
|                                 | (Principal   Financial Officer)                                   |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
§ 4190.1 Effect of wildfire management decisions. ( a ) Notwithstanding the provisions of 43 CFR 4.21(a)(1), when BLM determines that vegetation, soil, or other resources on the public lands are at substantial risk of wildfire due to drought, fuels buildup, or other reasons, or at immediate risk of erosion or other damage due to wildfire, BLM may make a rangeland wildfire management decision effective immediately or on a date established in the decision. Wildfire management includes but is not limited to: ( 1 ) Fuel reduction or fuel treatment such as prescribed burns and mechanical, chemical, and biological thinning methods (with or without removal of thinned materials); and
( 2 ) Projects to stabilize and rehabilitate lands affected by wildfire.
( b ) The Interior Board of Land Appeals will issue a decision on the merits of an appeal of a wildfire management decision under paragraph (a) of this section within the time limits prescribed in 43 CFR 4.416.
[68 FR 33804, June 5, 2003]
Group 4200—Grazing Administration; Alaska; Livestock
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 159 (Friday, October 8, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60284-60285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22746]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2004-18819; Airspace Docket No. 04-ACE-45]


Modification of Class D Airspace; and Modification of Class E 
Airspace; Grand Island, NE

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Direct final rule; request for comments, correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects a direct final rule; request for comments 
that was published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, September 22, 
2004, (69 FR 56690) [FR Doc. 04-21226]. It corrects an error in the 
legal description of the Class E airspace area extending upward from 
700 feet above the surface at Grand Island, NE.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on 0901 UTC, January 20, 
2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda Mumper, Air Traffic Division, 
Airspace Branch, ACE-520A, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 901 Locust Street, Kansas City, MO 64106; 
telephone: (816) 329-2524.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History

    Federal Register Document 04-21226, published on Wednesday, 
September

[[Page 60285]]

22, 2004, (69 FR 56690) modified the Class D airspace area, the Class E 
airspace area designated as a surface area, the Class E airspace area 
designated as an extension to the Class D airspace area and the Class E 
airspace area extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at Grand 
Island, NE. The modification corrected discrepancies in the Central 
Nebraska Regional Airport airport reference point used in the legal 
descriptions, redefined extensions to the airspace areas and brought 
the legal descriptions of the Grand Island, NE Class E airspace areas 
into compliance with FAA Orders 7400.2E, Procedures for Handling 
Airspace Matters, and 8260.19C, Flight Procedures and Airspace. 
However, the format of the legal description for the Class E airspace 
area extending upward from 700 feet above the surface was incorrect.
    Accordingly, pursuant to authority delegated to me, the legal 
description of the Class E airspace area extending upward from 700 feet 
above the surface at Grand Island, NE, as published in the Federal 
Register on Wednesday, September 22, 2004, (69 FR 56690) [FR Doc. 04-
21226] is corrected as follows:


Sec.  71.1  [Corrected]

0
On page 56692, Column 2, third paragraph, fifth and sixth lines, delete 
``Grand Island VORTAC (lat. 40[deg]59'03'' N., long. 98[deg]18'53'' 
W.).'' In the last line of the same paragraph, change ``Central 
Nebraska Regional'' to read ``Central Nebraska Regional Airport''.

    Issued in Kansas City, MO, on September 29, 2004
Paul J. Sheridan,
Manager, Air Traffic Division, Central Region.
[FR Doc. 04-22746 Filed 10-7-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of VAALCO Energy, Inc. (the “**Company**”) onForm 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “**Report**”), I, Robert L. Gerry, III, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

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

Dated:August 10, 2009