alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §4306. Report to Congress

#### (a) In general

Not later than 1 year after November 7, 2000, and annually thereafter, the Secretary, in consultation with the Director, shall prepare and submit to the Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives a report on the operation of the Office.

#### (b) Contents of report

Each report prepared under subsection (a) shall include—

(1) for the period covered by the report, a summary of the activities conducted by the Secretary, acting through the Director, in carrying out sections 4303 through 4305 of this title; and

(2) any recommendations for legislation that the Secretary, in consultation with the Director, determines to be necessary to carry out sections 4303 through 4305 of this title.

(Pub. L. 106–464, §7, Nov. 7, 2000, 114 Stat. 2018.)

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

#### Change of Name

Committee on Resources of House of Representatives changed to Committee on Natural Resources of House of Representatives by House Resolution No. 6, One Hundred Tenth Congress, Jan. 5, 2007.
******Exhibit
99.2**



**CERTIFICATION**



**PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

In connection with this quarterly
report of Tayco Developments, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period
ended February 28, 2003 to be filed with Securities and Exchange Commission on
or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kenneth G. Bernstein, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods
covered by the Report.



|Date:
      April 11, 2003 | By: | s/Kenneth G. Bernstein 
|-------------------------- | --- | -----------------------
|                           |     | Kenneth G. Bernstein,  
|                           |     | Chief Financial Officer
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 of Skynet Telematics, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB, for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Mark Dingley, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


/s/ Mark Dingley
-----------------------
    Mark Dingley
    Chief Financial Officer

April 30, 2007


<PAGE>
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 377

**Question 377:** Are licensees required by 10 CFR 19.13 to report to individuals the results of monitoring performed but not required under 10 CFR 20.1502? 10 CFR 19.13 states that radiation exposure data shall be reported to the individual, and that "the information reported shall include data and results obtained pursuant to Commission regulations, orders or license conditions, as shown in records maintained by the licensee pursuant to Commission regulations. From this, it appears that the results of monitoring performed but not required by NRC regulations is not required to be reported to individuals.

**Answer:** No. The results of monitoring performed but not required by NRC regulations are not required to be reported to individuals.

(References: 10 CFR 19.13, 10 CFR 20.1502).

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, November 24, 2017
#### John F. Brayer, Appellant, v. Lily B. M. Fenn, as Executrix, etc., Respondent.

Motion for leave to appeal to Court of Appeals granted, and questions for review certified.
#### Olga S. Evans, Respondent, v. Victor F. Evans, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from an order granting motion of plaintiff for an injunction *pendente lite*and denying the cross motion of defendant, appearing specially, to vacate service of the summons and complaint in an action to enjoin defendant from prosecuting a suit for divorce in another State. Order reversed on the law, without costs, the motion of plaintiff denied, and the motion of defendant granted, without costs. The defendant appeared specially in moving to vacate. *(Muslushy*v. *Lehigh Valley Coal Co.,*225 FT. Y. 584, 587.) It appears to be undisputed that plaintiff failed to procure an order for substituted service (Civ. Prae. Act, §§ 230, 231) before serving the summons, complaint and motion papers on defendant in the State of Arkansas. The valid commencement or the pendency of an action is an indispensable prerequisite to the granting of a temporary injunction. (Civ. JPrae. Act, §§ 877, 878; *Shotland*v. *Mulligan,*134 App. Div. 504, 505; *Matter of Greene,*153 App. Div. 8, 10, 11.) This procedural defect precludes consideration of the questions of the jurisdiction of the court *(Robinson*v. *Robinson,*254 App. Div. 696, affd. 279 FT. Y. 582) and the necessity of an injunction as a remedy. *(Pereira*v. *Pereira,*272 App. Div. 281.) Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Wenzel, JJ., concur.
###### Editorial Note on Part 121

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 121 appear at 72 FR 50039 and 50040, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 121.409 What size standard applies in an unrestricted procurement for Certificate of Competency purposes?

For the purpose of receiving a Certificate of Competency in an unrestricted procurement, the applicable size standard is that corresponding to the NAICS code set forth in the solicitation. The offeror need not be the manufacturer of any of the items acquired.

[61 FR 3286, Jan. 31, 1996, as amended at 65 FR 30863, May 15, 2000; 81 FR 34259, May 31, 2016]
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to the footer section




National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Reconstruction Era





Contact Us
  Discover the Reconstruction Era National Historic Network
 Black and white photo of crowd of African Americans in front of white buildingArlington, VA was home to a large Freedman community, pictured here. Library of Congress Reconstruction was a process that took place in communities throughout the nation. Many units of the national park system, as well as sites managed by state, local, and private entities preserve locations and stories that tell the story of this crucial transition from slavery to freedom in the aftermath of Civil War. You can learn how to become part of the Network on our Join the Network page.
To navigate this listing, either scroll to the state you are interested in, or select the state from the drop down menu below. Please contact the individual sites for information about planning your visit. At the bottom of this page find the Network photograph gallery, which includes photos from each site. For questions regarding the network, contact us.
 
 Listing of Network Sites View all the sites in the Reconstruction Era National Historic Network with this table.SiteCityStateWebsite
 Network Site Photographs
 Last updated: February 23, 2024
 Tools Calendar
Site Index
Contact Us


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
First Department,

April, 1948.

(April 5, 1948.)

#### Prudential Exporters Corporation, Appellant, v. Guaranty Trust Company, Respondent.

Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion.. Present — Glennon, J. P., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Shientag, JJ. [See *post,*p. 1007.]
#### Olive M. McGirr, Respondent, v. Elizabeth W. Keesler, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Harvey Keesler, Deceased, Appellant, and Eva B. Rooney et al., Defendants.

Plaintiff, a daughter of the decedent, brought an action in the County Court of Rockland County for the partition of a parcel of real property, the sole asset of decedent’s estate, against the defendant administratrix, widow of decedent and only other party in interest, and certain creditors. The administratrix interposed an answer which contained certain denials but did not set out an affirmative defense in respect of the pendency of any proceeding in the Surrogate’s Court or elsewhere. The administratrix appellant moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Order denying appellant’s motion affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The motion did not seek the exercise of discretion. It merely raised a question of law as to whether or not the County Court had jurisdiction of a partition action. That jurisdiction is expressly conferred by section 67 of the Civil Practice Act. The fact that the Surrogate’s Court has concurrent jurisdiction does not preclude the bringing of a partition action in the County Court. However, if upon a proper showing the appellant had invoked the discretion of the Surrogate’s Court, then the usual rule — that of favoring the specialized jurisdiction of the Surrogate’s Court in the administration of the affairs of decedent, especially where proceedings have been first instituted in that court *(Wade*v. *Bigham,*178 Mise. 305; *Matter of Sehopperle,*189 Mise. Ill) — might well have been applied. Here, however, the appellant did not invoke such discretion. She seemingly has refrained, for some reason, from proceeding in the Surrogate’s Court to bring about a sale of the property here involved and a distribution of the proceeds. She is still free to move to do so if she moves without delay under circumstances which commend themselves to a sound exercise of discretion by the Surrogate. Hagarty, Acting P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ., concur:1
HomeAbout NRCRadiation ProtectionHow the NRC Protects YouHealth Physics Positions Based on 10 CFR Part 20

# Health Physics Questions and Answers - Question 405

**Question 405:** Regulatory Guide 8.25 (Section C.1.7) states that "to determine whether the concentration exceeds the DAC over the short term, the sample collection time should not exceed one hour. Shorter sample collection times may be used if desired, but they are not required." 
> 
(a) Does this section mean to imply that the duration of a work zone air sample should not exceed one hour if it may be used to determine whether an area needs to be posted or otherwise controlled? 

(b) Under what circumstances does this one hour rule apply?

**Answer:**
> 
(a) No. The one-hour criterion applies only for sampling used "to determine whether the concentration exceeds the DAC over the short term" (emphasis added).

(b) The one-hour criterion is guidance; it is not a "rule." See answer to (a) regarding the circumstances of application. 

(References: Regulatory Guide 8.25, 10 CFR 20.1902)

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Friday, December 01, 2017
Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, June 21, 2017

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A17A1588. RANDY JENKINS HARMON, JR. v. THE STATE.

The appellant in this case failed to comply with the notice of docketing mailed by this 

Court and with Court of Appeals Rules 22 (a) and 23 (a), regarding the filing of an enumeration 

of errors and brief within twenty days after the appeal was docketed. See also Court of Appeals 

Rule 13.

On June 05, 2017, this Court ordered the appellant to file an enumeration of errors and a 

brief no later than June 15, 2017. As of the date of this order, the appellant's enumeration of 

errors and brief still have not been filed. Accordingly, this appeal is deemed abandoned and is 

hereby ordered DISMISSED. Court of Appeals Rules 7, 23 (a).

Because procedural deficiencies have deprived the appellant of the right of appellate 

review, the appellant is hereby informed of the following in accordance with Rowland v. State, 

264 Ga. 872 (452 SE2d 756) (1995):

This Court has dismissed your appeal because an enumeration of errors and a 

brief have not been filed on your behalf as required. If this failure occurred while 

you were represented by legal counsel and was due to your appellate counsel's 

failure to perform the duties of appellate counsel, and if you still wish to appeal, 

you may file a motion in the trial court for permission to pursue an out-of-time 

appeal. If the trial court grants your motion for an out-of-time appeal, you will 

have 30 days from the filing date of the order granting your motion to file in the 

trial court a notice of appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence. If the 

trial court denies your motion for an out-of-time appeal, you will have 30 days 

from the filing date of the order denying your motion to file in the trial court a 

notice of appeal from that order.
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, June 21, 2017.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

The Clerk of Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the appellant as well as to 

the appellant's attorney of record, if any. The appellant's attorney is also directed to send a copy 

of this order to the appellant.
Summons 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

JOE ALCIDES RODRIGUEZ,

CASE NO. 0:20-cv-61229-RAR

Plaintiff,

vs.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

SONIA QUIÑONES, in her official 

Capacity as Chief of the Hallandale Beach 

Police Department, and Officer MATTHEW 

CASEY.

Defendants.

___________________________________/

NOTICE OF FILING PROPOSED SUMMONS

Plaintiff, Joe Alcides Rodriguez, hereby files his proposed summons to OFFICER 

MATTHEW CASEY.

Respectfully submitted,

Eduardo A. Maura, Esq.

Luis F. Quesada, Esq.

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Ayala Law, P.A.

1390 Brickell Avenue, 335

Miami, FL 33131

305-570-2208 Phone

eayala@ayalalawpa.com

lawayala@gmail.com

By: /s/ Eduardo A. Maura

Eduardo A. Maura

Florida Bar No. 91303

Case 0:20-cv-61229-RAR Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/31/2020 Page 1 of 1
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5061 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for Medicare 

coverage and coding for qualified psychologist services furnished by advanced psychology trainees. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2022 

Mr. DAINES (for himself and Ms. STABENOW) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide 

for Medicare coverage and coding for qualified psychologist services furnished by advanced psychology trainees. 

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 ‘‘Expand Qualified Psy5 chologist Services Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. COVERAGE AND CODING FOR QUALIFIED PSYCHOL7 OGIST SERVICES FURNISHED BY ADVANCED 

8 PSYCHOLOGY TRAINEES. 

9 (a) COVERAGE.— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 5061 IS

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 1861(ii) of the So2 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(ii)) is amend3 ed— 

4 (A) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘(ii)’’; 

5 (B) in paragraph (1), as added by para6 graph (1) of this subsection, by inserting ‘‘(or 

7 furnished by an advanced psychology trainee 

8 under the general supervision of a clinical psy9 chologist (as so defined))’’ after ‘‘(as defined by 

10 the Secretary)’’; and 

11 (C) by adding at the end the following new 

12 paragraph: 

13 ‘‘(2) In this subsection: 

14 ‘‘(A) The term ‘advanced psychology trainee’ 

15 means a postdoctoral resident who has obtained a 

16 doctoral degree in psychology, is seeking a license to 

17 practice psychology, and is engaged in a 1- or 2-year 

18 period of additional supervised experiential training 

19 to acquire the skills or hours required for licensure 

20 through a program accredited by an organization de21 termined appropriate by the Secretary. 

22 ‘‘(B) The term ‘general supervision’ has the 

23 meaning given that term in section 410.26(a)(3) of 

24 title 42, Code of Federal Regulations (or any suc25 cessor regulation).’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 5061 IS

1 (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made 

2 by this subsection shall apply to services furnished 

3 on or after January 1, 2024. 

4 (b) ESTABLISHMENT OF MODIFIER.—Not later than 

5 January 1, 2024, the Secretary of Health and Human 

6 Services shall establish a modifier to indicate services fur7 nished by an advanced psychology trainee pursuant to the 

8 amendments made by subsection (a). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### In the Matter of Anthony V. Scotti, an Incompetent Person, Respondent. Helen Scotti, as Committee of the Person and Property of Anthony V. Scotti, an Incompetent Person, Appellant.

The order appealed from should be modified by directing the Special Term to take evidence with respect to the mental health of the alleged incompetent on which to base the discharge of his committee, who is objecting to such an order. She should be given the opportunity of cross-examining the medical experts for the petitioner and b^ afforded an opportunity to have an examination of him by her own physician, who should have access to the medical history on file at the Rockland State Hospital. The issue, of course, is whether he is capable of conducting the ordinary affairs of business and of life. It may be noted that she is committee of his person as well as of his property. *(Matter of Gibson,*272 App. Div. 107; *Matter of Ireland,*246 App. Div. 113.) As so modified the order is affirmed, without costs. Present — Peck, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Callahan and Van Yoorhis, JJ.; Cohn, J., dissents and votes to affirm. Settle order on notice.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000894789
<NAME>                        PIRANHA, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S.DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         958,147
<SECURITIES>                                   1,229,243
<RECEIVABLES>                                  943,015
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3,415,686
<PP&E>                                         1,925,443
<DEPRECIATION>                                 81,990
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 18,564,777
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          3,132,352
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    462,500
<COMMON>                                       9,479
<OTHER-SE>                                     14,960,446
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   18,564,777
<SALES>                                        338,343
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               338,343
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               6,275,192
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               173,065
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             31,840
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,141,754)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,141,754)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,141,754)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.71)



</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 99.2
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**PURSUANT TO**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**(18 U.S.C. 1350)**
In connection with the Quarterly Report of Wells Real Estate Fund VII, L.P. (the“Registrant”) on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended September 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Douglas P. Williams, Chief Financial Officerof the corporate general partner of the General Partner of the Registrant, hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350) that, to the best of his knowledge and beliefs:

         (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 theRegistrant.
     /s/  DOUGLAS P. WILLIAMS   **        Douglas P. Williams****        Chief Financial Officer****        November 13, 2002**    ********
Exhibit 4.347

 

/Emblem of the Russian Federation/

 

FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND MASS MEDIA

 

LICENSE

 

No. 135052 dated October 05, 2015

 

For Rendering

 

Telematic services

 

This License is granted to

 

Limited Liability Company

 

Communication systems (Zelenaya Tochka Group)

 

Primary State Registration Number of a Legal Entity 
 (Individual Entrepreneur) (OGRN, OGRNIP)

 

1026801161639

 

Tax Identification Number (TIN)

 

6831017477

 











 

Location address (place of residence):

 

211 r., 16, Internacionalnaya str., Tambov, Tambov region, 392000

 

The territory covered by telecommunications services is specified in the Appendix.

 

This License is granted for a term:

 

until October 05, 2020.

 

This License is granted by decision of the licensing body - Order dated August 28, 2015 No. 580-pчc

 

Appendix being an integral part of this license is executed on 2 sheets.

 

	
Deputy Head
    	
/signature/ O.A.   Ivanov
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Stamp here
    	
 
    
	
Official   seal:
    	
 
    
	
MINISTRY OF TELECOM AND   MASS
   COMMUNICATIONS
    	
 
    
	
OF THE RUSSIAN   FEDERATION
    	
 
    
	
FEDERAL SERVICE FOR   SUPERVISION
   IN THE SPHERE
    	
 
    
	
OF   COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION
   TECHNOLOGY
    	
 
    
	
AND MASS MEDIA
    	
 
    
	
PSRN 1087746736296
    	
 
    


 

CN 071829