alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §1152. Coordination of enforcement regarding violations of certain health care provider requirements; complaint process

#### (a) Investigating violations

Upon receiving a notice from a State or the Secretary of Health and Human Services of violations of sections 300gg–131, 300gg–132, or 300gg–135 of title 42, the Secretary of Labor shall identify patterns of such violations with respect to participants or beneficiaries under a group health plan or group health insurance coverage offered by a health insurance issuer and conduct an investigation pursuant to section 1134 of this title where appropriate, as determined by the Secretary. The Secretary shall coordinate with States and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in accordance with section 1136 of this title and with section 104 of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, where appropriate, as determined by the Secretary, to ensure that appropriate measures have been taken to correct such violations retrospectively and prospectively with respect to participants or beneficiaries under a group health plan or group health insurance coverage offered by a health insurance issuer.

#### (b) Complaint process

Not later than January 1, 2022, the Secretary shall ensure a process under which the Secretary—

(1) may receive complaints from participants and beneficiaries of group health plans or group health insurance coverage offered by a health insurance issuer relating to alleged violations of the sections specified in subsection (a); and

(2) transmits such complaints to States or the Secretary of Health and Human Services (as determined appropriate by the Secretary) for potential enforcement actions.

(Pub. L. 93–406, title I, §522, as added Pub. L. 116–260, div. BB, title I, §104(b)(1), Dec. 27, 2020, 134 Stat. 2830.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 104 of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, referred to in subsec. (a), is section 104 of Pub. L. 104–191, which is set out as a note under section 300gg–92 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO: 20-cv-61241-RUIZ

APRIL HICKS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Defendant.

________________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Status Report filed by the Government on 

February 11, 2022 [ECF No. 97]. The Parties have since informed the Court that a trial as to 

damages is necessary.

Trial as to issues of damages is specially set to commence on Monday, March 21, 2022 at 

3PM, before the Honorable Paul C. Huck, United States District Judge, 400 North Miami Ave, 

13th Floor, Courtroom 13-2, Miami, Florida. 

DONE AND ORDERED in Miami, Florida on February 28, 2022.

PAUL C. HUCK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies furnished to:

Counsel of Record

Case 0:20-cv-61241-RAR Document 98 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/01/2022 Page 1 of 1
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site.(Historical purposes)
**Title:****Annual report FY...**
 
2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005
 
SuDoc:ID 1.27: M 29/2/
Item Number:0900-I-18 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000638220
 
October 30, 2017
453 P.2d 597

#### Ophelia Gonzales GIRARD, Petitioner, v. Honorable J. M. SCARBOROUGH, District Judge of the First Judicial District, Respondent.

No. 8825.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

May 13, 1969.

NOBLE, Chief Justice, and MOISE, COMPTON and TACKETT, Justices concurring.

Ordered that the alternative writ of mandamus heretofore issued herein on April 15, 1969, be and the same is hereby made permanent.
§ 147.400 What are my responsibilities as a(n) SBA awarding official? As a(n) SBA awarding official, you must obtain each recipient's agreement, as a condition of the award, to comply with the requirements in— ( a ) Subpart B of this part, if the recipient is not an individual; or
( b ) Subpart C of this part, if the recipient is an individual.
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION II

101 Marietta St., Suite 2900, Atlanta, GA 30323

Tel. 404-331-5503 or 7878

No.: II-96-71 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contacts: Ken Clark 404-331-5503 (Wednesday, August 21, 1996)

Roger Hannah 404-331-7878

NRC NAMES NEW SENIOR RESIDENT INSPECTOR

AT OCONEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials in Atlanta have announced the assignment of

Mike Scott as the agency's Senior Resident Inspector at the Oconee nuclear power plant, located

near Seneca, South Carolina. He succeeds Paul Harmon, the Senior Resident Inspector at the

Oconee plant since 1991.

Scott began his career as a research assistant at the Walter Reed Army Institute of

Research and then at the University of Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas. Prior to

joining the NRC in 1984, Scott was a lead engineer at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in

Bremerton, Washington. At the NRC, Scott has worked as a reactor inspector, project engineer

and a resident inspector at the St. Lucie and Farley nuclear plants. He received a degree in

Biochemistry from the University of West Florida and a degree in Mechanical Engineering from

the University of Houston.

Scott officially became the Senior Resident Inspector at the Oconee plant on August 4,

joining NRC Resident Inspectors Gary Humphrey and Nancy Salgado. The NRC inspectors at

the Oconee plant can be reached at 864-882-6927.

###
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs

Washington, DC 20555

Phone 301-415-8200 Fax 301-415-2234

Internet:opa@nrc.gov

No. 96-160 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Friday, November 15, 1996)

NRC LAUNCHES SPECIAL INSPECTION AT FRAMATOME COGEMA FACILITY

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has sent a special threemember inspection team to the Framatome Cogema nuclear fuel

facility in Lynchburg, Va. The team will attempt to determine

how a nuclear power plant fuel assembly recently received in

Lynchburg was inadvertently returned in its original shipping

cask to its point of origin in Greifswald, Germany.

NRC dispatched the team Wednesday (November 13) after

Framatome Cogema reported that it could not account for one of

180 fuel assemblies ˇ containing 126 fuel rods of less than 2-

percent enriched uranium ˇ it recently received from Germany.

Yesterday, however, the company informed NRC that the fuel

assembly had been found in Germany in the original shipping

container which had returned after partial unloading in the U.S.

Two of the team members are specialists in material control

and accounting. The other is the senior resident inspector from

another NRC-licensed facility in Lynchburg, who will focus on

transportation activities. They will conduct a comprehensive

examination of the incident to determine how such an error could

have occurred and to ensure that corrective measures are taken.

The material involved ˇ fresh, Russian-produced fuel

originally intended for use in a nuclear power plant in East

Germany ˇ has never been used in a reactor and thus does not

present a significant public health and safety concern.

Framatome Cogema has a contract to remove the fuel pellets from

the 180 fuel assemblies and to deliver the uranium to another

facility for further processing.

####
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 2, 2012 

Order 

 

March 2, 2012 

144517(88)(89) 

NIGHTWATCH CAPITAL GROUP, 

L.L.C., 

 Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 SC: 144517 

v CoA 299378 

 Oakland CC: 08-096312-CZ 

QUESTOR MANAGEMENT COMPANY, 

L.L.C., et al., 

 Defendants-Appellants. 

______________________________________ 

 On order of the Chief Justice, motions for the temporary admission to practice of 

Lawrence J. Fox and Charles J. Vinicombe are considered and they are granted.
**Exhibit13**Certification Pursuant to18 U.S.C. Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002     Inconnection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of **HDFC BankLimited**(the “Company”) for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifiespursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to such officer’s best knowledge, that:     1) the Report fully complies, in all material respects, withthe 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 ofMarch 31, 2005 and for the periods presented in the Report.The foregoing certification is provided solely for the purposes of complying with the provisions of Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not intended to be used or relied upon for any other purpose.
      /s/ Aditya Puri   Aditya PuriManaging Director         /s/ Vinod G. Yennemadi   Vinod G. YennemadiGroup Head — Finance, Legal &Administration  Date:September 30, 2005
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5090 

To require the Administrator of the Maritime Administration to publicly 

report cargo preference data on an annual basis. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 15, 2022 

Mrs. FISCHER (for herself and Mr. PETERS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To require the Administrator of the Maritime Administration 

to publicly report cargo preference data on an annual basis. 

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 ‘‘Cargo Preference Re5 porting Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter I of chapter 553 of 

8 title 46, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

9 end the following: 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 5090 IS

1 ‘‘§ 55306. Annual report on cargo preference data 

2 ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

3 ‘‘(1) ADMINISTRATOR.—The term ‘Adminis4 trator’ means the Administrator of the Maritime Ad5 ministration. 

6 ‘‘(2) CARGO PREFERENCE DATA.—The term 

7 ‘cargo preference data’ means data made available 

8 to the Maritime Administration regarding compli9 ance with sections 55302, 55303, 55304, and 55305 

10 of this subchapter and section 2631 of title 10, 

11 United States Code. 

12 ‘‘(b) IN GENERAL.—By March 1 of each fiscal year, 

13 the Administrator shall prepare, submit to Congress, and 

14 make public a report regarding the cargo preference data 

15 received by the Administrator for the preceding fiscal year. 

16 ‘‘(c) CONTENTS.—Each report submitted under sub17 section (b) shall include, for each Federal department or 

18 agency— 

19 ‘‘(1) the total cargo volume and amount 

20 shipped by the department or agency on vessels of 

21 the United States for the period of the report; and 

22 ‘‘(2) the total cargo volume and amount 

23 shipped by the department or agency on foreign ves24 sels for such period. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 5090 IS

1 ‘‘(d) RULEMAKING.—The Administrator shall pro2 mulgate rules to implement this section, which shall clarify 

3 how the report will be made accessible to the public.’’. 

4 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sec5 tions for chapter 553 of title 46, United States Code, is 

6 amended by inserting after the item relating to section 

7 55305 the following: 

‘‘Sec. 55306. Annual report on cargo preference data.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
#### Isidor Gainsburg, Respondent, v. Chase National Bank of the City of New York, Respondent; Howard Hasbrouck, Impleaded Defendant-Appellant; Isaac H. Levy et al., Impleaded Defendants-Respondents, and Clara Sielcken-Schwarz et al., Impleaded Defendants.

No opinion. Present — -Peck, P. J., Dore, Cohn, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ; Dore, J., taking no part.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Region III Office of Public Affairs

801 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532-4351

NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT: RIII-97-108 (revised)

December 9, 1997

CONTACT: Jan Strasma 630/829-9663

Angela Greenman 630/829-9662

E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

NRC STAFF TO MEET WITH CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. TO DISCUSS

APPARENT VIOLATIONS AT PALISADES NUCLEAR PLANT

Time and Date Change to 1 p.m. on December 19

(Previously announced as December 18)

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet December

19 with Consumers Energy Company officials for a predecisional

enforcement conference on apparent violations associated with the

temporary disabling of the control rod system at the Palisades

Nuclear Power Station.

The meeting will be at 1 p.m. (CST) in the Third Floor

Conference Room, NRC Region III Office, 801 Warrenville Road,

Lisle, Illinois. The meeting is open to public observation.

The apparent violations involved an October 17 incident in

which the entire reactor control rod drive system was taken out

of service for maintenance while the plant was in operation.

The drives move the control rods in the reactor to increase

or decrease the reactor power level. A separate system is used

to quickly shut down the reactor by fully inserting all control

rods.

Maintenance was planned on one of 45 control rod drives.

Instead of shutting off electric power to just that drive,

however, the plant staff blocked the electric power to all 45

control rod drives.

The control rod drives were disabled for about 3 hours while

the maintenance was performed. During that time, the reactor

could have been shut down if necessary by inserting all the

control rods in an automatic or manual reactor trip. However,

the control rods could not have been moved individually to adjust

reactor power level.
The decision to hold an enforcement conference does not mean

the NRC has determined that a violation has occurred or that

enforcement action will be taken. Rather, the purpose is to

discuss apparent violations, their causes and safety

significance; to provide the licensee an opportunity to point out

any errors that may have been made in the NRC inspection report;

and to enable the company to outline its proposed corrective

actions.

No decision on the apparent violations or any contemplated

enforcement action, such as a fine, will be made at this

conference. Those decisions will be made by senior NRC officials

at a later date.

#####

Note: The schedule of NRC meetings open to public observation is

available on the NRC’s internet web site at

<http://www.nrc.gov/OPA>.
|  |  | **Home | Search       | Help       | Contact       Us  ** |
|--|--|---------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  |  |

|  |
|--|
### Subtitle A—Jurisdiction, Administration, and Enforcement
### §12. Director of bureau; appointment

The Women's Bureau shall be in charge of a director, a woman, to be appointed by the President.

(June 5, 1920, ch. 248, §2, 41 Stat. 987; Pub. L. 112–166, §2(i)(2), Aug. 10, 2012, 126 Stat. 1286.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Part of section 2 of act June 5, 1920, constitutes section 13 of this title.

Words "who shall receive an annual compensation of $5,000" were omitted in view of the Classification Acts. See sections 5101 et seq. and 5331 et seq. of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

#### Amendments

2012—Pub. L. 112–166 struck out ", by and with the advice and consent of the Senate" before period at end.

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

#### Effective Date of 2012 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 112–166 effective 60 days after Aug. 10, 2012, and applicable to appointments made on and after that effective date, including any nomination pending in the Senate on that date, see section 6(a) of Pub. L. 112–166, set out as a note under section 113 of Title 6, Domestic Security.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of Labor, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of Labor, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 6 of 1950, §§1, 2, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1263, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
§ 146.100 Conditions on use of funds. ( a ) No appropriated funds may be expended by the recipient of a Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement to pay any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with any of the following covered Federal actions: the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
( b ) Each person who requests or receives from an agency a Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement shall file with that agency a certification, set forth in appendix A, that the person has not made, and will not make, any payment prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) Each person who requests or receives from an agency a Federal contract, grant, loan, or a cooperative agreement shall file with that agency a disclosure form, set forth in appendix B, if such person has made or has agreed to make any payment using nonappropriated funds (to include profits from any covered Federal action), which would be prohibited under paragraph (a) of this section if paid for with appropriated funds.
( d ) Each person who requests or receives from an agency a commitment providing for the United States to insure or guarantee a loan shall file with that agency a statement, set forth in appendix A, whether that person has made or has agreed to make any payment to influence or attempt to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with that loan insurance or guarantee.
( e ) Each person who requests or receives from an agency a commitment providing for the United States to insure or guarantee a loan shall file with that agency a disclosure form, set forth in appendix B, if that person has made or has agreed to make any payment to influence or attempt to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with that loan insurance or guarantee.
EXHIBIT 32.1: CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.
  1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

            In connection with the accompanying Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB
of Magna-Lab, Inc. for the quarter ended May 31, 2004, the undersigned hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

            (1)   such Quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended May
                  31, 2004 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 such Quarterly report on Form
                  10-QSB for the quarter ended May 31, 2004 fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of Magna-Lab, Inc.


      July 14, 2004               /s/ Lawrence A. Minkoff
                                  -----------------------
                                  Name: Lawrence A. Minkoff
                                  Title: President (principal executive officer)
### **CHAPTER 13—EXEMPLARY REHABILITATION CERTIFICATES**
Opinion issued June 13, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The

First District of Texas

NO. 01-12-00707-CV

———————————

JOEL D. MALLORY, Appellant

V.

J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO 

CHASE HOME FINANCE, L.L.C., AND CODILIS & STAWIARSKI, P.C.,

Appellees

On Appeal from the 151st District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2010-64487

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Joel Mallory filed suit against appellees J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, 

N.A., as successor by merger to Chase Home Finance, L.L.C. (“J.P. Morgan 

Chase”) and Codilis & Stawiarski, P.C., asserting claims under the Texas Deceptive 

Trade Practices Act (“DTPA”) and the Texas Debt Collection Act (“TDCA”), 
2

among other claims. See generally TEX. BUS. & COM. CODE ANN. chapter 17 (West 

2011 & Supp. 2012); TEX. FIN. CODE ANN. chapter 392 (West 2011). The trial 

court granted J.P. Morgan Chase’s motion for summary judgment as to all claims 

asserted by Mallory against J.P. Morgan Chase. Subsequently, the trial court 

granted Codilis & Stawiarski’s motion to dismiss Mallory’s DTPA claims against 

it. After the trial court signed this second order, Mallory filed a notice of appeal. 

Generally, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Lehmann v. 

Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). We have no jurisdiction to hear 

an appeal from a judgment that is not final, unless there is specific statutory 

authority permitting an appeal before final judgment. See Stary v. DeBord, 967 

S.W.2d 352, 352–53 (Tex. 1998); Iacono v. Lyons, 6 S.W.3d 715, 716–17 (Tex. 

App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, no pet.). Here, the record reflects that no final 

judgment has been entered by the trial court in this case, because there is no order 

disposing of the remaining claims pending against Codilis & Stawiarski. 

On May 13, 2013, the appellees filed a motion to dismiss this appeal for want 

of jurisdiction because there is no final judgment. We requested appellant file a 

response to the motion, and appellant filed a response on May 30, 2013. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.3. The response does not demonstrate grounds for continuing the 

appeal.
3

Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal for want of 

jurisdiction. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f). We dismiss all pending motions 

as moot. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justice Jennings, Brown, and Huddle.
#### § 19.305 Preference in admission.

A recipient to which §§ 19.300 through 19.310 apply shall not give preference to applicants for admission, on the basis of attendance at any educational institution or other school or entity that admits as students only or predominantly members of one sex, if the giving of such preference has the effect of discriminating on the basis of sex in violation of §§ 19.300 through 19.310.