alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 1422.13 Objections to conduct of hearing.

Any objection to the introduction of evidence may be stated orally or in writing and shall be accompanied by a short statement of the grounds of such objection, and be included in the record. No such objection shall be deemed waived by further participation in the hearing. Automatic exceptions will be allowed to all adverse rulings.
### §16355. National Laboratory designation

After August 8, 2005, the Secretary shall not designate a facility that is not listed in section 15801(3) of this title as a National Laboratory.

(Pub. L. 109–58, title IX, §991, Aug. 8, 2005, 119 Stat. 913.)
Due to the scripting of the web page many features are not replicated in the archival version. All editions of Continuum have been captured and are availabe at: ~\netsite-docs\gpo12476\gpo12476\www.nrel.gov\continuum.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4384 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4384

To permit manufacturers of generic drugs to provide additional warnings 
 with respect to such drugs in the same manner that the Food and Drug 
              Administration allows brand names to do so.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 18, 2012

  Mr. Van Hollen (for himself and Mr. Braley of Iowa) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                                Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To permit manufacturers of generic drugs to provide additional warnings 
 with respect to such drugs in the same manner that the Food and Drug 
              Administration allows brand names to do so.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Patient Safety and Drug Labeling 
Improvement Act''.

SEC. 2. PERMITTING LABELING CHANGES FOR GENERICS.

    Section 505(j) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act (21 
U.S.C. 355(j)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(11)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, 
        the holder of an approved application under this subsection may 
        change the labeling of a drug so approved in the same manner 
        authorized by regulation for the holder of an approved new drug 
        application under subsection (b).
            ``(B) In the event of a labeling change made under 
        subparagraph (A), the Secretary may order conforming changes to 
        the labeling of the equivalent listed drug and each drug 
        approved under this subsection that corresponds to such listed 
        drug.''.
                                 <all>
```
§ 20.9 Application procedure. ( a ) *Submission of application.* To be eligible for retirement or survivor benefits under this part, a former spouse must submit a properly executed and completed application to the Department of State by June 22, 1990 or, if an exception is made for compelling cause to this deadline, within 60 days following the date of the letter from the Department transmitting the application to the former spouse. The application must be delivered or mailed to the Retirement Division (PER/ER/RET), Room 1251, Department of State, Washington, DC 20520.
( b ) *Request for application.* The Department of State has attempted to mail applications to all former spouses of whom it is aware that it believes may be eligible for benefits under this part. Any eligible former spouse who does not have an application at the time this part is published in the Federal Register (October 7, 1988) must communicate with the Department as soon as possible and request an application. Request may be in person or by mail to the address in § 20.9(a) or by telephoning the Retirement Division on area code 202-647-9315. A request by letter must include the typed or printed full name and current address of the former spouse. It shall also give the dates of marriage and divorce or annulment that establish eligibility and fully identify the Foreign Service employee or former employee in question and state the agency of current or last employment.
( c ) *Payment of benefits delayed.* Payment of benefits cannot be made to a former spouse until the application for benefits is approved by the Retirement Division of the Department. Upon such approval, benefits will be paid to an eligible former spouse retroactively, if necessary, back to the commencing date determined under this part.
FORM 13F COVER PAGE

Report for the Calendar Year or Quarter Ended: December 31,2005

Check here if Amendment [   ]; Amendment Number:
This Amendment (Check only one.):  [   ] is a restatement.
                                   [   ] adds new holdings entries.

Institutional Investment Manager Filing this Report:

Name:    Continental Assurance Company
Address: CNA Plaza
	 Chicago,IL 60685


13F File Number: 28-386

The institutional investment manager filing this report and the
person by whom it is signed hereby represent that the person
signing the report is authorized to submit it, that all
information contained herein is true, correct, and complete, and
that it is understood that all required items, statements,
schedules, lists, and tables, are considered integral parts of
this form.


Person Signing this Report on Behalf of Reporting Manager:

Name:  Lynne Gugenheim
Title: Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel
Phone: (312) 822 4921
Signature, Place, and Date of Signing:
February 15,2006
Chicago, Illinois, 60685
I AM SIGNING  THIS REPORT AS REQUIRED BY THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934

Report Type (Check only one.):

 [    ]              13F HOLDINGS REPORT.

 [  x ]              13F NOTICE.

 [    ]              13F COMBINATION REPORT.

List of Other Managers Reporting for this Manager:

The securities on which Continental Assurance Company exercises
shared investment discretion have been reported upon by CNA Financial
Corporation on behalf of Continental Assurance Company.
<Page>
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4407 

To amend the indemnification responsibilities applicable to the Secretary 

of Defense when Department of Defense property at military installations 

closed pursuant to a base closure law is conveyed to expand such indemnification responsibilities to include all military installations closed since 

October 24, 1988. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 19, 2012 

Mr. YOUNG of Indiana introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend the indemnification responsibilities applicable to 

the Secretary of Defense when Department of Defense 

property at military installations closed pursuant to a 

base closure law is conveyed to expand such indemnification responsibilities to include all military installations 

closed since October 24, 1988. 

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 ‘‘Base Redevelopment 

5 and Indemnification Correction Act’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4407 IH

1 SEC. 2. INDEMNIFICATION OF TRANSFEREES OF PROPERTY 

2 AT ANY CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION. 

3 Section 330 of the National Defense Authorization 

4 Act for Fiscal Year 1993 (Public Law 102–484; 10 U.S.C. 

5 2687 note) is amended— 

6 (1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ‘‘pursuant 

7 to a base closure law’’ and inserting ‘‘after October 

8 24, 1988, the date of the enactment of the Defense 

9 Authorization Amendments and Base Closure and 

10 Realignment Act (Public Law 100–526; 10 U.S.C. 

11 2687 note)’’; and 

12 (2) in subsection (f), by striking paragraph (3). 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Editorial Note on Part 141
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 141 appear at 68 FR 51358, Aug. 26, 2003.

§ 141.5 Compliance information. ( a ) *Cooperation and assistance.* Each responsible Department official shall to the fullest extent practicable seek the cooperation of recipients in obtaining compliance with this regulation and shall provide assistance and guidance to recipients to help them comply voluntarily with this part.
( b ) *Compliance reports.* Each recipient shall keep such records and submit to the responsible Departmental official or his designee timely, complete and accurate compliance reports at such times, and in such form and containing such information, as a responsible Departmental official or his designee may determine to be necessary to enable him to ascertain whether the recipient has complied or is complying with this part. In general, recipients should have available for the Department racial and ethnic data showing the extent to which members of minority groups are beneficiaries of Federally assisted programs. In the case in which a primary recipient extends Federal financial assistance to any other recipient, such other recipient shall also submit such compliance reports to the primary recipient as may be necessary to enable the primary recipient to carry out his obligations under this part.
( c ) *Access to sources of information.* Each recipient shall permit access by the responsible Department official or his designee during normal business hours to such of its books, records, accounts, and other sources of information, and its facilities as may be pertinent to ascertain compliance with this part. Where any information required of a recipient is in the exclusive possession of any other agency, institution or person and this agency, institution or person shall fail or refuse to furnish this information, the recipient shall so certify in its report and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information.
( d ) *Information to beneficiaries and participants.* Each recipient shall make available to participants, beneficiaries, and other interested persons such information regarding the provisions of this part and its applicability to the program for which the recipient receives Federal financial assistance, and make such information available to them in such manner, as the responsible Department official finds necessary to apprise such persons of the protections against discrimination assured them by the Act and this part.
[30 FR 314, Jan. 9, 1965, as amended at 38 FR 17947, July 5, 1973]
EXIBIT 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 Quarterly Report of New York Regional Rail Corporation
(the Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Wayne Eastman, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 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/ Wayne Eastman
-----------------
Wayne Eastman,
President
May 19, 2003
#### S. C. Posner, Inc., Appellant, v. Emanuel A. Jackson and Another, Respondents.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, the amended answer to be served within five days from service of order. No opinion. Present —■ Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Smith, Page and Greenbaum, JJ.
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 16

- 00229

- CR

DIHO LLOYD BROWN

, Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee

From the County Court at Law

Walker County, Texas

Trial Court No. 15

- 0673

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Diho Brown, has filed a motion requesting the dismissal of this appeal.

See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2(a). We have not issued a decision in the appeal, and appellant and

his attorney have personally signed the motion. See id. Accordingly, we grant the motion

and hereby dismiss appellant’s appeal.Brown v. State Page 2 AL SCOGGINS

Justice

Before Chief Justic e Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed November 2, 2016

Do not publish

[CR25]
#### In the Matter of Charlotte Weir, Respondent, v Stephen Berger, as Commissioner of the Department of Social Services of the State of New *630York, Appellant, and James R. Dumpson, as Commissioner of the Department of Social Services of the City of New York, Respondent.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the appellant State commissioner, dated October 3, 1975 and made after a fair hearing, which affirmed a determination of the local agency denying petitioner’s application for a grant of home relief, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 24, 1976, which (1) granted the petition and annulled the determination of the State commissioner and (2) directed that petitioner be awarded a retroactive grant of public assistance. Judgment affirmed, with costs. The local agency offered no evidence at the fair hearing to contradict petitioner’s testimony that it had not informed her at the time of her application that she would have to reduce her life insurance policies in order to become eligible for public assistance. Since the agency failed to provide sufficient details to petitioner concerning her eligibility requirements (see 18 NYCRR 351.1 [b][l]; 352.15 [b] [1]), its subsequent denial of her application, based upon her ownership of an excess amount of life insurance, was improper. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani and Rabin, JJ., concur.
### §274f–2. Grants regarding hospital organ donation coordinators

#### (a) Authority

#### (1) In general

The Secretary may award grants to qualified organ procurement organizations and hospitals under section 273 of this title to establish programs coordinating organ donation activities of eligible hospitals and qualified organ procurement organizations under section 273 of this title. Such activities shall be coordinated to increase the rate of organ donations for such hospitals.

#### (2) Eligible hospital

For purposes of this section, the term "eligible hospital" means a hospital that performs significant trauma care, or a hospital or consortium of hospitals that serves a population base of not fewer than 200,000 individuals.

#### (b) Administration of coordination program

A condition for the receipt of a grant under subsection (a) is that the applicant involved agree that the program under such subsection will be carried out jointly—

(1) by representatives from the eligible hospital and the qualified organ procurement organization with respect to which the grant is made; and

(2) by such other entities as the representatives referred to in paragraph (1) may designate.

#### (c) Requirements

Each entity receiving a grant under subsection (a) shall—

(1) establish joint organ procurement organization and hospital designated leadership responsibility and accountability for the project;

(2) develop mutually agreed upon overall project performance goals and outcome measures, including interim outcome targets; and

(3) collaboratively design and implement an appropriate data collection process to provide ongoing feedback to hospital and organ procurement organization leadership on project progress and results.

#### (d) Rule of construction

Nothing in this section shall be construed to interfere with regulations in force on April 5, 2004.

#### (e) Evaluations

Within 3 years after the award of grants under this section, the Secretary shall ensure an evaluation of programs carried out pursuant to subsection (a) in order to determine the extent to which the programs have increased the rate of organ donation for the eligible hospitals involved.

#### (f) Matching requirement

The Secretary may not award a grant to a qualifying organ donation entity under this section unless such entity agrees that, with respect to costs to be incurred by the entity in carrying out activities for which the grant was awarded, the entity shall contribute (directly or through donations from public or private entities) non-Federal contributions in cash or in kind, in an amount equal to not less than 30 percent of the amount of the grant awarded to such entity.

#### (g) Funding

For the purpose of carrying out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated $3,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2009.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title III, §377B, as added Pub. L. 108–216, §4, Apr. 5, 2004, 118 Stat. 586.)
STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

503446.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

THOMAS M. HERLIHY (SBN 83615)

JOHN T. BURNITE (SBN 162223)

WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP

525 Market Street, 17

th

Floor

San Francisco, CA 94105-2725

Tel.: (415) 433-0990

Fax: (415) 434-1370

Email: herlihy@wilsonelser.com

john.burnite@wilsonelser.com

Attorneys for Defendants

UNUM GROUP (previously known as

UNUMPROVIDENT CORPORATION),

THE PAUL REVERE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,

and NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LEWIS G. SHEPLER II, M.D.

Plaintiff,

vs.

UNUMPROVIDENT CORPORATION; THE

PAUL REVERE LIFE INSURANCE

COMPANY and UNUM GROUP, inclusive,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C08-00240 MEJ

STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF

TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S

COMPLAINT

Case 3:08-cv-00240-MEJ Document 71 Filed 01/08/10 Page 1 of 2
-1-

STIPULATION RE EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

Case No.: C08-00240 MEJ

503446.1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 6-1(a), the parties, plaintiff Lewis G. Shepler II,

M.D. and defendants Unum Group (previously known as UnumProvident Corporation), The Paul

Revere Life Insurance Company, and New York Life Insurance Company (“defendants”), hereby

stipulate that defendant shall have an extension to respond to the Complaint up to and including

March 4, 2010.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

KNOX RICKSEN, LLP

Dated: January 7, 2010 By_______/s/____________________

Thomas E. Fraysse

Attorney for Plaintiff

LEWIS G. SHEPLER II, M.D.

WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN &

DICKER LLP

Dated: January 7, 2010 By_________/s/_____________________

Thomas M. Herlihy

John T. Burnite

Attorney for Defendants

UNUM GROUP (Previously known as

UNUMPROVIDENT CORPORATION),

THE PAUL REVERE LIFE INSURANCE

COMPANY and NEW YORK LIFE

INSURANCE COMPANY

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED that defendants have up to and including March 4, 2010 to respond

to plaintiff’s complaint.

Date: January __, 2010 _____________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8

Case 3:08-cv-00240-MEJ Document 71 Filed 01/08/10 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         1020173
<NAME>                        NEW YORK REGIONAL RAIL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                            1
<CASH>                                     126,807
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                              692,484
<ALLOWANCES>                               58,715
<INVENTORY>                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           1,224,083
<PP&E>                                     4,223,240
<DEPRECIATION>                             78,550
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             5,456,598
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      5,612,741
<BONDS>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<COMMON>                                   16,822
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,174,097)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               5,456,598
<SALES>                                    2,402,104
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           2,402,104
<CGS>                                      2,147,819
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              2,147,819
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           50,856
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         64,710
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (184,079)
<INCOME-TAX>                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (184,079)
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                               (184,079)
<EPS-BASIC>                                (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                              (.00)


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent 

 v. 

MARK ETHAN MCFALL, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 105 MM 2014 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 3rd day of September, 2014, the Petition for Leave to File Petition 

for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. Counsel is directed to file a Petition for 

Allowance of Appeal within 15 days of this order.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7731

FRANK GARCIA, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versusATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA; RAYMOND SMITH, Respondents - Appellees.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. William L. Osteen, Sr., District Judge. (CA-97-109-6) Submitted: April 16, 1998 Decided: April 30, 1998 Before WILKINS and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Frank Garcia, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* While the district court did not specifically discuss Appellant's claim regarding the filing of tax forms as "new evidence" warranting habeas relief, we find this claim to be without merit for the same reasons the district court dismissed Appellant's other "new evidence" claims. See Stockton v. Virginia, 852 F.2d 740, 749 (4th Cir. 1988). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. * Garcia v. Attorney Gen. of North Carolina , No. CA-97-109-6 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 21, 1997). To the extent Appellant seeks to raise issues in this court which were not first presented to the district court for consideration, we decline to review those issues. We further deny Appellant's motion for production of documents and for return of personal property. We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED