alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406

Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or nas@nrc.gov

I-99-28 April 12, 1999

Contact: Diane Screnci (610/337-5330) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan (610/337-5331)

NRC STAFF RELEASES FINDINGS OF FIRST LICENSE RENEWAL INSPECTION AT

CALVERT CLIFFS; SCHEDULES PUBLIC MEETING

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has released an inspection report on the first

license renewal inspection performed at the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Station in Lusby, Md.

The NRC staff will meet with the public on Thursday evening, April 15, to discuss the results of

this inspection. The plant is operated by Baltimore Gas and Electric (BG&E) Company.

The meeting will be held from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. in the Calvert Cliffs Public Education

Facility outside the main gate of the power station in Lusby, Maryland.

The NRC staff conducted the first of three special onsite safety inspection during the

week of February 8. This "scoping and screening" inspection was conducted to verify that the

company's license renewal program is implemented consistent with the company's license

renewal application and pertinent regulations. Subsequent inspections will verify that programs

are in place to manage the material conditions of the systems, structures and components.

The inspection team concluded that Baltimore Gas and Electric properly implemented

the scoping and screening methodology approved by the NRC and that the references and

documentation supporting the information in the license renewal application are in auditable and

retrievable forms.

The full inspection report is posted on the NRC’s web page at:

http://www.nrc.gov/OPA/reports/renewal.htm

#
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 128 (Thursday, July 3, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 38006]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15642]

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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting of the Hawaii Advisory 
Committee

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and 
regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights (Commission) and the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) that a planning meeting the 
Hawaii Advisory Committee (Committee) to the Commission will be held on 
Wednesday, July 30, 2014, at the Aina Haina Public Library, 5246 
Kalanianaole Highway, Honolulu, HI 96821. The meeting is scheduled to 
begin at 1:00 p.m. and adjourn at approximately 2:30 p.m. The purpose 
of the meeting is for the Committee to plan future project activities.
    Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments. The 
comments must be received in the Western Regional Office of the 
Commission by August 29, 2014. The address is Western Regional Office, 
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 300 N. Los Angeles Street, Suite 2010, 
Los Angeles, CA 90012. Persons wishing to email their comments, or to 
present their comments verbally at the meeting, or who desire 
additional information should contact Angelica Trevino, Civil Rights 
Analyst, Western Regional Office, at (213) 894-3437, (or for hearing 
impaired TDD 913-551-1414), or by email to atrevino@usccr.gov. Hearing-
impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require the services 
of a sign language interpreter should contact the Regional Office at 
least ten (10) working days before the scheduled date of the meeting.
    Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced 
at the Western Regional Office, as they become available, both before 
and after the meeting. Persons interested in the work of this advisory 
committee are advised to go to the Commission's Web site, 
www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Western Regional Office at the above 
email or street address. The meeting will be conducted pursuant to the 
provisions of the rules and regulations of the Commission and FACA.

    Dated: June 30, 2014.
David Mussatt,
Acting Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit.
[FR Doc. 2014-15642 Filed 7-2-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-15-00219-CR

EX PARTE REGINALD WEATHERS

From the 54th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015-2155-2

ORDER

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is dismissed as moot because, as confirmed in a 

letter from his counsel, Appellant has been indicted, which establishes probable cause as 

a matter of law and thus renders moot his habeas proceeding. See Ex parte Welch, 729 

S.W.2d 306, 309 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1987, no pet.) (citing Ex parte Plumb, 595 S.W.2d 544, 

545 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1980) (“The return of an indictment establishes probable 

cause as a matter of law.”)).

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

(Chief Justice Gray concurs without opinion)

Order issued and filed December 23, 2015

Do not publish
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

475 Allendale Road

King of Prussia PN 19406

No. I-00-09 January 25, 2000

CONTACT: Diane Screnci (610) 337-5330/e-mail: dps@nrc.gov

Neil A. Sheehan (610) 337-5331/e-mail: nas@nrc.gov

MEETING AT OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT POSTPONED

Tonight’s meeting to present the results of the Nuclear Regulatory Commisson review of the

radiological condition of land adjacent to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant has been postponed because of

heavy snowfall. It had been scheduled for 6 p.m. in the Administration Building cafeteria at the plant, which is

located on Route 9 in Lacey Township, New Jersey. It will be rescheduled at a later date.

GPU Nuclear Corporation, operator of the plant, intends to sell about 600 acres of the 755-acre site.

The NRC staff has been evaluating the proposed sale to determine if there are any issues that have the potential

to adversely affect public health and safety, impact the environment or compromise the continued safe

operation of Oyster Creek. As part of that review, NRC staff conducted an on-site confirmatory survey and

inspection from November 15 to 18 to verify and validate GPU Nuclear's assessment of the radiological

condition of the land involved in the sale.

#####
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.909 Certification for goods exported to Peru. ( a ) *Submission of certification to CBP.* Any person who completes and issues a certification for a good exported from the United States to Peru must provide a copy of the certification (or such other medium or format approved by the Peru customs authority for that purpose) to CBP upon request.
( b ) *Notification of errors in certification.* Any person who completes and issues a certification for a good exported from the United States to Peru and who has reason to believe that the certification contains or is based on incorrect information must promptly notify every person to whom the certification was provided of any change that could affect the accuracy or validity of the certification. Notification of an incorrect certification must also be given either in writing or via an authorized electronic data interchange system to CBP specifying the correction (*see* §§ 10.932 and 10.933 of this subpart).
( c ) *Maintenance of records* — ( 1 ) *General.* Any person who completes and issues a certification for a good exported from the United States to Peru must maintain, for a period of at least five years after the date the certification was signed, all records and supporting documents relating to the origin of a good for which the certification was issued, including the certification or copies thereof and records and documents associated with: ( i ) The purchase, cost, and value of, and payment for, the good;
( ii ) The purchase, cost, and value of, and payment for, all materials, including indirect materials, used in the production of the good; and
( iii ) The production of the good in the form in which the good was exported.
( 2 ) *Method of maintenance.* The records referred to in paragraph (c) of this section must be maintained as provided in § 163.5 of this chapter.
( 3 ) *Availability of records.* For purposes of determining compliance with the provisions of this part, the records required to be maintained under this section must be stored and made available for examination and inspection by the Center director or other appropriate CBP officer in the same manner as provided in part 163 of this chapter.
Exhibit 15.4








CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-156686) of our report dated April 28, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Sapiens International Corporation N.V., included in this annual report on Form 20-F of Formula Systems (1985) Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2009.




Tel- Aviv, Israel
/s/ Kost, Forer, Gabbay & KaisererApril 28, 2010
KOST, FORER, GABBAY & KAISERERA Member of Ernst & Young Global
gthp_ex443





 






Exhibit 4.43



 


PROMISSORY
NOTE


 


Per
Board Compensation Committee Memo dated February 19,
2021.


(Replaces long term
note payable of original principal of $319,204.30, dated September
4, 2018)


 


 


	

Original
Issuance Date: February 19, 2021

	
 

	

Principal
Amount: $267,085.25







 


THIS
PROMISSORY NOTE is duly authorized and validly Note of Guided
Therapeutics, Inc., a Delaware corporation, (the
“Company”), having its principal place of business at
5835 Peachtree Corners East, Suite B, Norcross, Georgia
30092.


 


FOR
VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned promises to pay to Gene S. Cartwright
(“Holder”) the principal sum of TWO HUNDRED SIXTY SEVEN
THOUSAND EIGHTY FIVE DOLLARS AND TWENTY FIVE CENTS ($267,085.25),
in lawful money of the United States of America, at such place as
Holder may designate in writing.


 


The
entire unpaid principal balance due on this Promissory Note (this
“Note”), together with all accrued and unpaid interest
and fees, if any, at the choice of the Holder, shall be due and
payable in full on the second
anniversary of this agreement. The Note shall accrue 6%
simple annual interest from the date thereof and mature on February
18, 2023.


 


All
parties to this Note, including maker and any sureties, endorsers,
or guarantors, hereby waive protest, presentment, notice of
dishonor, and notice of acceleration of maturity and agree to
continue to remain bound for the payment of principal, interest and
all other sums due under this Note, notwithstanding any change or
changes by way of release, surrender, exchange, modification or
substitution of any security for this Note or by way of any
extension or extensions of time for the payment of principal and
interest, if any; and all such parties waive all and every kind of
notice of such change or changes and agree that the same may be
made without notice or consent of any of them.


 


This
Note shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the
laws of the State of Georgia, regardless of laws that might
otherwise govern under applicable principles of conflicts of
law.


 


IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has caused this instrument to be
duly executed the day and year first above written.


 


 


GUIDED
THERAPEUTICS, INC.


 


 


By:/Mark L.
Faupel/


Name:     
Mark L. Faupel


Title:
COO
#### In re: Jin E. KIM, Debtor. *593Arturo M. CISNEROS, Chapter 7 Trustee, Appellant, v. Jin E. Kim, Appellee.

No. 01-55250.

BAP No. CC-00-01123-MoPB.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 10, 2002 *.

Decided May 23, 2002.

Before KLEINFELD and GRABER, Circuit Judges, and BOLTON,** District Judge.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

 The Honorable Susan Ritchie Bolton, United States District Judge for Arizona, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

Appellant Arturo M. Cisneros, trustee of Jin E. Kim’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy estate, appeals from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s determination that the debtor’s employee retirement plan funds were fully exempt from the bankruptcy estate under California law. Because the relevant date for determining the status of exemptions is the petition date,1 we affirm for the reasons stated by the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel in its published opinion in *Cisneros v. Kim (In re Kim).**2*

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

1

. *See Little v. Reaves (In re Reaves),*285 F.3d 1152, 1156 (9th Cir.2002).

2

. 257 B.R. 680 (B.A.P. 9th Cir.2000).
### §4592. Payment of sums due deceased Senators and Senate personnel

Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Senate, a person serving as a Senator or officer or employee whose compensation is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate may designate a beneficiary or beneficiaries to be paid any unpaid balance of salary or other sums due such person at the time of his death. When any person dies while so serving, any such unpaid balance shall be paid by the disbursing officer of the Senate to the designated beneficiary or beneficiaries. If no designation has been made, such unpaid balance shall be paid to the widow or widower of that person, or if there is no widow or widower, to the next of kin or heirs at law of that person.

Section 50 of the Revised Statutes 1 shall not be effective as to persons included within the foregoing.

(Jan. 6, 1951, ch. 1213, Ch. I, §1, 64 Stat. 1224; Pub. L. 92–607, ch. V, §503, Oct. 31, 1972, 86 Stat. 1505.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

Section 50 of the Revised Statutes, referred to in text, was classified to section 38 of this title and was repealed by Pub. L. 104–186, title II, §203(4), Aug. 20, 1996, 110 Stat. 1725. See section 5305 of this title.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 36a of this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Amendments

**1972**—Pub. L. 92–607 inserted provisions for designation of a beneficiary by Senators and officers and employees whose compensation is disbursed by Secretary of Senate to whom shall be paid any unpaid balance of salary or other sums due such person at time of death.

1 See References in Text note below.
exhibit 99.1



                    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 Annual report of CareDecision
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year
ending December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), We,
Robert Cox, President/CEO, and Keith Berman, Treasurer/CFO,
of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge,
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/ Robert Cox
--------------
Robert Cox
President/CEO
April 24, 2003





/s/ Keith Berman
----------------
Keith Berman
Treasurer/CFO
April 24, 2003


/1/
EXHIBIT 12



FIRST REPUBLIC PREFERRED CAPITAL CORPORATION

(A Majority Owned Subsidiary of First Republic Bank)



STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF

RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES



|                                                  |  | Year ended December 31,
|------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                                                  |  | 2002                   
|                                                  |  | (Dollars in thousands) 
|I.    Earnings                                    |  |                        
|Net income                                        |  | $                      
|Fixed charges excluding preferred stock dividends |  |                        
|                                                  |  |                        
|Earnings before fixed charges                     |  | $                      
|                                                  |  |                        
|II.   Fixed charges:                              |  |                        
|Preferred stock dividends                         |  | $                      
|                                                  |  |                        
|III.  Ratios of earnings to fixed charges         |  |                        
|                                                  |  |                        

|
|

|
|
## Sales Record by Customers- 2009

**Company Street**  **City State**  **PostalCode Country/Region**  **Phone Fax**  **Product Total Sale (USD)** **Percentage (%)** 1 534410 Singapore CG 66,784.15 0.26 2 Petaling JayaSelangor 47301 Malaysia RG 16,400.00 0.06

3 169075 Singapore RG & PFAD 156,264.55 0.60 4 Petaling JayaSelangor 47500 Malaysia RG 41,000.00 0.16 5 Montmorency Cedex 95161 France CG 123,112.50 0.48

6 Auckland New Zealand RG 1,300.00 0.01 7 Petaling JayaSelangor 46350 Malaysia PFAD 223,957.20 0.86 8 Nagoya City, Aichi 464-0858Japan PME 13,400.00 0.05

9 238871 Singapore RG & CG 191,435.80 0.74 10 79903 Singapore PME 27,465.69 0.11 11 179094 Singapore RG & CG 54,307.65 0.21 12 68894 Singapore CG 71,579.25 0.28 13 Pasir GudangJohor 81700 Malaysia PFAD 94,197.00 0.36 14 Disstt U.S. Nagar India CG 37,357.50 0.14

15 Klang Selangor 41200 Malaysia CG 138,997.40 0.54 16 238880 Singapore PME 24,456,043.4494.40 17 178892 Singapore CG 105,386.15 0.41 18 89004 Singapore CG 86,700.20 0.33 **25,905,688.48 100** 

For Internal Use Only Page 1 Created on : 3Nov2009
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-cv-22791-BLOOM/Louis

VILMA MARQUEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

NATIONAL FIRE AND MARINE

INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant.

______________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Bill of Costs, ECF No. [153]

(“Motion”), filed on March 15, 2022. The Motion was previously referred to Magistrate Judge

Lauren Fleischer Louis for a Report and Recommendations (“R&R”). See ECF No. [155]. On July 

12, 2022, the Magistrate Judge issued a R&R recommending that the Motion be granted. ECF No. 

[176]. The R&R states that the parties shall file any objections within fourteen (14) days of the 

date of service of a copy of the R&R. Id. at 7. To date, the parties have filed no objections, nor

have the parties sought additional time in which to do so.

Nevertheless, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the R&R and the record in this 

case and is otherwise fully advised. See Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009) 

(citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Upon review, the Court finds the R&R to be well reasoned and 

correct. The Court therefore agrees with the analysis in the R&R and concludes that the Motion 

must be GRANTED for the reasons set forth therein.

Case 1:20-cv-22791-BB Document 178 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2022 Page 1 of 2
Case No. 20-cv-22791-BLOOM/Louis

2

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The R&R, ECF No. [176], is ADOPTED.

2. The Motion, ECF No. [153], is GRANTED.

3. Plaintiff is awarded a total of $3,284.78 in costs.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on July 27, 2022.

_________________________________

BETH BLOOM

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to: 

Counsel of Record

Case 1:20-cv-22791-BB Document 178 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/28/2022 Page 2 of 2
NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

801 Warrenville Road

Lisle IL 60532

Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov/OPA

No. III-00-24 May 23, 2000

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630)829-9663/e-mail: rjs2@nrc.gov

Pam Alloway-Mueller (630)829-9662/e-mail: pla@nrc.gov

NRC TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS TO DISCUSS ITS PLANS TO MONITOR

URANIUM ENRICHMENT PLANTS AS LAYOFFS OCCUR

** MAY 30 IN PADUCAH, KENTUCKY, AND MAY 31 IN , PIKETON, OHIO **

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold public meetings in Paducah, Kentucky, and

Piketon, Ohio, on May 30 and 31 to discuss its plans to monitor activities at the uranium enrichment

plants there as U. S. Enrichment Corporation reduces the size of its production staffs at the two plants

in July.

The NRC has two full-time resident inspectors at each uranium enrichment plant with

additional inspections performed by staff members from its regional office in Lisle, Illinois, and its

Rockville, Maryland, headquarters.

U. S. Enrichment Corporation announced in February that it would cut its workforce by 850 out

of a total of 3,550 employees at the two plants. The projected number was subsequently reduced to

625. The company operates the two plants, which are owned by the U. S. Department of Energy. The

Department of Energy retains jurisdiction over portions of each plant site.

The NRC staff will hold the public meetings to review the agency’s inspection plans to assure

that U. S. Enrichment Corporation continues to meet NRC regulatory requirements following the

workforce reductions. The staff members will also discuss the NRC’s role in regulating the

enrichment facilities. Following the NRC presentation, there will be a public question and answer

period.

The Paducah meeting will be at 7 p.m., Tuesday, May 30, at Crounse Hall 101 (Engineering

Building), Paducah Community College, 4810 Alben Barkley Drive.

The Piketon meeting will be at 7 p.m., Wednesday, May 31, at the Piketon Research and

Extension Center, Ohio State University, 1864 Shyville Road.

#####
§ 7.36 Permit reviews and disputes. ( a ) Any affected person disputing the decision of a Federal land manager with respect to the issuance or denial of a permit, the inclusion of specific terms and conditions in a permit, or the modification, suspension, or revocation of a permit may request the Federal land manager to review the disputed decision and may request a conference to discuss the decision and its basis.
( b ) The disputant, if unsatisfied with the outcome of the review or conference, may request that the decision be reviewed by the head of the bureau involved.
( c ) Any disputant unsatisfied with the higher level review, and desiring to appeal the decision, pursuant to § 7.11 of this part, should consult with the appropriate Federal land manager regarding the existence of published bureau appeal procedures. In the absence of published bureau appeal procedures, the review by the head of the bureau involved will constitute the final decision.
( d ) Any affected person may request a review by the Departmental Consulting Archeologist of any professional issues involved in a bureau permitting decision, such as professional qualifications, research design, or other professional archaeological matters. The Departmental Consulting Archeologist shall make a final professional recommendation to the head of the bureau involved. The head of the bureau involved will consider the recommendation, but may reject it, in whole or in part, for good cause. This request should be in writing, and should state the reasons for the request. See § 7.33(f) for the address of the Departmental Consulting Archeologist.