alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-09-01T17:28:35-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
### SUBCHAPTER II—WORKER PROTECTION
## SERVE D MARC H 8 , 201 0 U.S . DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC EO FHEARING S WASfflNGTON , D.C . I N TH EMATTE RO F REDO X TECH , LLC , Respondent . FA A DOCKE T NO . CP09AL001 3 (Civi l Penalt y Proceeding ) DM S NO . FAA-2009-097 8 ADMINISTRATIV ELA WJUDGE' S ORDE R DISMISSIN GPROCEEDIN G Counse l for

th e Complainan t

ha s notifie dm e that , "i nvie w o f a settlemen t reache db y th e parties, " th e Complainan t ha s withdraw nth e complaint . I nconsideratio n o f

th e foregoin g an dpursuan t t o sectio n13.21 5 o f

th e Rule s o f Practic e an dProcedure , 1 4 C.F.R . § 13.215 , thi s proceedin g i s hereb y dismisse dwithprejudice , an dth e docke t i s closed . Th e hearin g schedule dfor Marc h25 , 201 0 i s cancelled . I T I S S O ORDERED .

Isaa c D . Benki n Administrativ e La w Judg eFA A Docke t No . CP09AL001 3 (Civi l Penalty Action ) SERVIC ELIS T ORIGINA L& ON ECOP Y Federal Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC^3 0 Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit e 2W1000 '

ON ECOP Y Dr . Joh n Haselo w Redo x Tech , LL C Responden t 20 0 Quad e Driv e Cary,NC2751 3 TEL : 919-678-014 0 FAX : 911-678-015 0 Geral dA . Ellis , Esq . Complainant' s Counse l Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n Offic e o f th e Regiona l Counse l P.O . Bo x 2063 6 Atlanta , GA 30320-063 1 TEL : 404-305-520 0 FAX : 404-305-522 3 Th e Honorabl e Isaa c D . Benkin , Administrativ e Law Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 1200 New Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Eas t Buildin g Groun dFloor , Roo mEl2-32 0 Washington , D C 2059 0 TEL : Attorne y 202-366-213 9 Legal Assistan t

202-366-213 2 FAX : 202-366-753 6

' Service wa

s b y U.S . Mail . Fo

r servic e i n person o r b y expeditedcourier , us e the followin g address : Federa

l Aviatio n Administration , 600 Independenc e Avenue , S.W. , Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit

e 2W1000 , Washington , D C 20591 ; Attention : Hearing Docke t Clerk, AGC-430 .
10k  
 
 **Exhibit
23.1**
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 **Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**
 
 
 
 The Board
of Directors
 WebEx
Communications, Inc.:
 
 We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-61652 and 333-47892) on Form S-8 and (No. 333-67580) on Form S-3 of WebEx
Communications, Inc. of our reports dated March 9, 2005, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of WebEx Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2003 and 2004, and the related consolidated income statements,
statements of stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income and cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004, management’s
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2004, and effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2004, which reports appear in the December 31,
2004, annual report on Form 10-K of WebEx Communications, Inc.
 
 Our
report dated March 9, 2005 on management’s assessment of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, contains an
explanatory paragraph that states that the internal control over financial
reporting of WebEx Communications India Pvt. Ltd., which was the name assigned
to the CyberBazaar business acquired by WebEx Communications, Inc. during 2004
and excluded from management’s assessment, was excluded from our audit of
internal control over financial reporting of WebEx Communications, Inc. as of
December 31, 2004.
 
 
 
 /s/ KPMG
LLP
 
 
 Mountain
View, California
 March 16,
2005
### **CHAPTER 114—PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS**

#### SUBCHAPTER I—PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY SYSTEMS

#### Part A—Establishment of Systems

Sec.
10801.
Congressional findings and statement of purpose.
10802.
Definitions.
10803.
Allotments.
10804.
Use of allotments.
10805.
System requirements.
10806.
Access to records.
10807.
Legal actions.

#### Part B—Administrative Provisions

10821.
Applications.
10822.
Allotment formula and reallotments.
10823.
Payments under allotments.
10824.
Reports by Secretary.
10825.
Technical assistance.
10826.
Administration.
10827.
Authorization of appropriations.

#### SUBCHAPTER II—RESTATEMENT OF BILL OF RIGHTS FOR MENTAL HEALTH PATIENTS

10841.
Restatement of bill of rights.

#### SUBCHAPTER III—CONSTRUCTION

10851.
Construction of subchapters I and II; "individual with mental illness" defined.
# L_2019323EN.01002801.xml

| 12.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 323/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/28

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 14/2018

of 9 February 2018

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement [2019/2050]

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Decision 2011/785/EU of 28 November 2011 amending Decision 2008/911/EC establishing a list of herbal substances, preparations and combinations thereof for use in traditional herbal medicinal products (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Decision 2011/785/EU of 28 November 2011 amending Decision 2008/911/EC establishing a list of herbal substances, preparations and combinations thereof for use in traditional herbal medicinal products (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Annex II to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indent is added in point 15zl (Commission Decision 2008/911/EC) of Chapter XIII of Annex II to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32011 D 0785: Commission Implementing Decision 2011/785/EU of 28 November 2011 (OJ L 319, 2.12.2011, p. 102).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32011 D 0785: Commission Implementing Decision 2011/785/EU of 28 November 2011 (OJ L 319, 2.12.2011, p. 102).’

Article 2

The text of Implementing Decision 2011/785/EU in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 10 February 2018, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 9 February 2018.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Claude MAERTEN

---

(1)  
  OJ L 319, 2.12.2011, p. 102.

1

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
### §2104. Prohibition on former official's acceptance of compensation from contractor

(a) Prohibition.—A former official of a Federal agency may not accept compensation from a contractor as an employee, officer, director, or consultant of the contractor within one year after the official—

(1) served, when the contractor was selected or awarded a contract, as the procuring contracting officer, the source selection authority, a member of the source selection evaluation board, or the chief of a financial or technical evaluation team in a procurement in which that contractor was selected for award of a contract in excess of $10,000,000;

(2) served as the program manager, deputy program manager, or administrative contracting officer for a contract in excess of $10,000,000 awarded to that contractor; or

(3) personally made for the Federal agency a decision to—

(A) award a contract, subcontract, modification of a contract or subcontract, or a task order or delivery order in excess of $10,000,000 to that contractor;

(B) establish overhead or other rates applicable to one or more contracts for that contractor that are valued in excess of $10,000,000;

(C) approve issuance of one or more contract payments in excess of $10,000,000 to that contractor; or

(D) pay or settle a claim in excess of $10,000,000 with that contractor.

(b) When Compensation May Be Accepted.—Subsection (a) does not prohibit a former official of a Federal agency from accepting compensation from a division or affiliate of a contractor that does not produce the same or similar products or services as the entity of the contractor that is responsible for the contract referred to in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection (a).

(c) Implementing Regulations.—Regulations implementing this section shall include procedures for an official or former official of a Federal agency to request advice from the appropriate designated agency ethics official regarding whether the official or former official is or would be precluded by this section from accepting compensation from a particular contractor.

(d) Persons Subject to Penalties.—The following are subject to the penalties and administrative actions set forth in section 2105 of this title:

(1) A former official who knowingly accepts compensation in violation of this section.

(2) A contractor that provides compensation to a former official knowing that the official accepts the compensation in violation of this section.

(Pub. L. 111–350, §3, Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3729.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2104(a) | 41:423(d)(1). | Pub. L. 93–400, §27(d), as added Pub. L. 100–679, §6(a), Nov. 17, 1988, 102 Stat. 4063; Pub. L. 101–189, title VIII, §814(a)–(d)(1), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1495; Pub. L. 101–510, title XIV, §1484(l)(6), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1720; Pub. L. 102–25, title VII, §705(i), Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 121; Pub. L. 103–355, title VIII, §8301(e), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3397; Pub. L. 104–106, title XLIII, §4304(a), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 660. |
| 2104(b) | 41:423(d)(2). | |
| 2104(c) | 41:423(d)(5). | |
| 2104(d) | 41:423(d)(3), (4). | |

Section
|                                                                                                                                                                                     |  | Moldova: A Promising American Partner in Southeast Europe                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|**BISNISHome PageSearchBISNISEmbassyReportsCountryReportsIndustryReportsCustomsCornerPublicationsSourcesof FinanceFinanceLinkLeadsand EventsExchangeRatesState ExportsOtherSources** |  | Upcoming Investment ConferenceMay 19, 1999New York, New YorkOpportunities & Projects to be discussed:energy sector privatizationtelecom privatizationroad constructionlight industryfood processingtourismfurniture

Contact: 
Vlad Spanu, Minister-Counselor
Embassy of Moldova
Tel: (202) 667-1130; Fax (202) 667-1204
Email: [email protected] 
Website: www.moldova.org
This report is provided courtesy of the Business Information Service for the Newly
Independent States (BISNIS)
#### Milton B. Shapiro, Appellant, v Deborah Shapiro Kurtzman, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[819 NYS2d 666]

In an action, inter alia, to recover the proceeds of certain loans, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Sherwood, J.), dated July 11, 2005, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 5526 to include two orders entered in a related action into the record on appeal from an order entered in the instant action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff appealed from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Sherwood, J.), dated July 13, 2004, granting the respondent’s motion to strike the pleadings and to dismiss the second amended complaint insofar as asserted against her for failure to comply with discovery demands and court-ordered discovery *(see Shapiro v Kurtzman,*32 AD3d 508 [2006] [decided herewith]). In making that determination, the Supreme Court considered the respondent’s notice of motion and affirmation in support of the motion, the plaintiffs affidavit in opposition, and the respondent’s reply affirmation.

The plaintiff made a motion before the Supreme Court to include two prior orders of that court entered October 3, 2002 and October 4, 2002, respectively, into the record on appeal from the order dated July 13, 2004. Those orders were made in a separate action brought by the respondent against, among others, the plaintiff, entitled *Shapiro v Kurtzman,*under Rockland County index No. 62/02. The Supreme Court denied that motion. This appeal ensued.

As the two orders which the plaintiff sought to include into the record were not before the Supreme Court when it rendered its determination from which the appeal from the order dated July 13, 2004 was taken, they were properly excluded from the record on that appeal *(see*CPLR 5526; 22 NYCRR 800.5; *Matter of Dyno v Village of Johnson City,*255 AD2d 737 [1998]; *People v Hoppe,*239 AD2d 777 [1997]). Schmidt, J.P., Santucci, Mastro and Lifson, JJ., concur.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

          - 47 CFR Part 73 
          - [DA 04-3444; MB Docket No. 04-378; RM-11079] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission. 

# ACTION:

Proposed rule; dismissal. 

# SUMMARY:

                        At the request of Apex Broadcasting, Inc., the Audio Division dismisses the petition for rule making proposing the reallotment of Channel 258C0 from Lake Charles, Louisiana to West Orange, Texas, and the modification of Station KBXG(FM)'s license accordingly.                         *See*69 FR 60344, October 8, 2004. A showing of continuing interest is required before a channel will be allotted. It is the Commission's policy to refrain from making an allotment to a community absent an expression of interest. Therefore, we will grant the request to withdraw the instant proposal.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sharon P. McDonald, Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MB Docket No. 04-378, adopted October 27, 2004, and released October 29, 2004. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20054, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or                     *www.BCPIWEB.com.*                     This document is not subject to the Congressional Review Act. (The Commission is, therefore, not required to submit a copy of this Report and Order to GAO, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act,                     *see*5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) because the proposed rule was dismissed.)                 

Federal Communications Commission. 

John A. Karousos,

Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. 

[FR Doc. 04-25513 Filed 11-16-04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

JUNE 12, 2006

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

 [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 05-14590

 

D. C. Docket No. 04-00186 CV-T-26EAJ

ALL CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL, INC.,

WEST COAST NEONATOLOGY, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

MEDICAL SAVINGS INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant-Appellee.

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

 

(June 12, 2006)

Before DUBINA, KRAVITCH and JOHN R. GIBSON*, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

_________________________

*Honorable John R. Gibson, United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by

designation.
2

Plaintiffs/appellants, All Children’s Hospital, Inc. and West Coast

Neonatology, Inc., appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment to

Medical Savings Insurance Co. (“insurance company”), on plaintiffs’ claims for

breach of contract and declaratory judgment.

After reviewing the record, reading the parties’ briefs and having the benefit

of oral argument, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in

favor of the insurance company for the reasons given in the district court’s wellreasoned order filed on August 3, 2005.

AFFIRMED.
D STq ~~s UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 10 o ui 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900 2 ~ Seattle, WA 98101-3140 OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL 2T q~ PROI ADti11NISTRATOR 

### APR 2 4 2014 The Honorable Doug Ericksen Energy, Environment and Telecommunications Committee Chair Washington State Senate Post Office Box 40442 Olympia, Wasllington 98504-0442
Dear Senator Ericksen: Thank you for your letter dated April 3, 2014. I appreciate your taking the time to express your concerns regarding the Deparhnent of Ecology's (Ecology's) ongoing process to adopt human health criteria into Washington's water quality standards. As you know, the Environmental Protection Agency supports Ecology's efforts to use scientifically sound regional and local fish consumption data as part of its rulemaking. Your letter specifically asks about the EPA's process for reviewing the State's human health criteria and the EPA's perspective on the cancer risk level that Ecology may use to derive human health criteria for carcinogens. The EPA intends to comprehensively review Ecology's human health criteria, including how Ecology integrates science in its policy decisions to provide health protection for all citizens of Washington, including high fish consumers. In its review, the EPA must ensure that the hulnarl health criteria Washington State adopts are protective of applicable designated uses and based oI1 a souild scientific rationale, consistent with 40 CFR § 131.11(a). Currently, Washington's water quality standards contain a provision that states, "[r]isk-based criteria for carcinogenic substances shall be selected such that the upper-bound excess cancer risk is less than or equal to one in one inillion." WAC 173-201 A-240(6). If Ecology were to revise this language to allow for a different risk level, the EPA would expect Ecology to provide a rationale that explains how such a policy change would be protective given Ecology's current policy position and available data that indicate a broad spectrum of Washington citizens regularly eat fish. The EPA recommends that Ecology carefully consider the implications of making a potential change to its existing cancer risk level and how it would affect the health protection of all fish consumers in the State, including high fish consumers. Again, thank you for contacting the EPA. If you have any questions, please feel frec to contact me or have your staff contact Dan Opalski, the Director of the Office of Water and Waterslleds. You can reach Dan by phone at (206) 553-1855 or by email at opalski.dan@epa.gov

. S I Ilcerel y, /_

~ ---

~

~ Dennis J. McLerran Regional Administrator cc: Ms. Maia Bc11oIi, Dircctor, Washillgtoll Department of Ecoloby