alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §300ff–134. Procedures for notification of exposure

#### (a) Contents of notification to officer

In making a notification required under section 300ff–132 of this title or section 300ff–133(d)(2) of this title, a medical facility shall provide—

(1) the name of the infectious disease involved; and

(2) the date on which the victim of the emergency involved was transported by emergency response employees to the medical facility involved.

#### (b) Manner of notification

If a notification under section 300ff–132 of this title or section 300ff–133(d)(2) of this title is mailed or otherwise indirectly made—

(1) the medical facility sending the notification shall, upon sending the notification, inform the designated officer to whom the notification is sent of the fact that the notification has been sent; and

(2) such designated officer shall, not later than 10 days after being informed by the medical facility that the notification has been sent, inform such medical facility whether the designated officer has received the notification.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title XXVI, §2695C, as added Pub. L. 111–87, §13, Oct. 30, 2009, 123 Stat. 2901.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective as if enacted on Sept. 30, 2009, see section 2(a)(3)(B) of Pub. L. 111–87, set out as an Effective Date of 2009 Amendment; Revival of Section note under section 300ff–11 of this title.
### §286b–7. Financial support of biomedical scientific publications

(a) The Secretary, with the advice of the Board, shall make grants to, and enter into appropriate contracts with, public or private nonprofit institutions of higher education and individual scientists for the purpose of supporting biomedical scientific publications of a nonprofit nature and to procure the compilation, writing, editing, and publication of reviews, abstracts, indices, handbooks, bibliographies, and related matter pertaining to scientific works and scientific developments.

(b) Grants under subsection (a) in support of any single periodical publication may not be made for more than three years, except in those cases in which the Secretary determines that further support is necessary to carry out the purposes of subsection (a).

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IV, §476, as added Pub. L. 99–158, §2, Nov. 20, 1985, 99 Stat. 863.)
#### § 18.13 Representation.

A respondent or proposed respondent may appear in person or he/she may be represented by counsel or other representative. The Director General may be represented by an attorney or other employee of the Department.
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2614

To suspend temporarily the duty on Propiconazole Technical - Bulk. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 24, 2005

Mr. TERRY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on Propiconazole Technical 

- Bulk.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. PROPICONAZOLE TECHNICAL - BULK. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.90.18 Propiconazole Technical - 

(Bulk) (220kg Drum) 1-[[2-

(2,4-dichlorophenyl)–4-

propyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-

yl]methyl]-1H-1,2,4-triazole 

(CAS No. 60207–90–1) 

(provided for in subheading 

2934.99.12) ......................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 
2

•HR 2614 IH 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Martin Tierney, Respondent, v. Independent Warehouse Co., Baker & Williams, Appellant. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Appeal by a self-insured employer from a decision and award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. On June 19, 1959 claimant, aged 69, a warehouseman in appellant’s employ for the preceding 40 years was removing from a “ fiat ” truck cartons of dishes each weighing up to 100 pounds. He testified that in the course of this activity one of the containers slipped from his shoulder and fell striking his left instep. He applied homespun remedies to the injury until July 27, 1959 when he first consulted a physician who, upon examination, found a massive gangrenous area in the vicinity of the middle and second toes of the left foot and directed his immediate removal to a hospital where they were amputated by a surgeon. Subsequently upon readmittance a left lumbar sympathectomy to accelerate the healing process was performed and to a slight extent the original operation surgically revised. Oral notice of the accident was given to the employer by claimant’s son-in-law on July 27, 1959. Appellant challenges the board’s findings of accident and casual relationship on the ground that they are not supported by substantial evidence and its exeusal of the late filing of the notice of claim on the theory that it was prejudiced by claimant’s failure to secure prompt medical attention. Claimant’s testimony as to the happening of the accident was unequivocal. There was no direct proof to the contrary. The evidence of officers of appellant from which it was sought to create the inference that the accident did not occur presented only a question of his credibility, the determination of which was exclusively within the province of the board. The medical testimony was in agreement that claimant was suffering from pre-existing diabetes and arteriosclerosis. Based on his observations the operating surgeon testified that the injury was traumatic in origin and causally related to the accident. He further stated that the *845gangrenous condition which he found could have occurred even though claimant had received medical attention at an earlier date. There was medical evidence to the *contrary.*The *weight to be given the*respective expert opinions presented a question of fact for the board’s determination. We may not say as a matter of law that there is no substantial evidence to support its findings or that in the circumstances its exeusal of the untimely filing was unreasonable. Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Present — Bergan, P. J., Coon, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.
### §299b. Health care outcome improvement research

#### (a) Evidence rating systems

In collaboration with experts from the public and private sector, the Agency shall identify and disseminate methods or systems to assess health care research results, particularly methods or systems to rate the strength of the scientific evidence underlying health care practice, recommendations in the research literature, and technology assessments. The Agency shall make methods or systems for evidence rating widely available. Agency publications containing health care recommendations shall indicate the level of substantiating evidence using such methods or systems.

#### (b) Health care improvement research centers and provider-based research networks

#### (1) In general

In order to address the full continuum of care and outcomes research, to link research to practice improvement, and to speed the dissemination of research findings to community practice settings, the Agency shall employ research strategies and mechanisms that will link research directly with clinical practice in geographically diverse locations throughout the United States, including—

(A) health care improvement research centers that combine demonstrated multidisciplinary expertise in outcomes or quality improvement research with linkages to relevant sites of care;

(B) provider-based research networks, including plan, facility, or delivery system sites of care (especially primary care), that can evaluate outcomes and evaluate and promote quality improvement; and

(C) other innovative mechanisms or strategies to link research with clinical practice.

#### (2) Requirements

The Director is authorized to establish the requirements for entities applying for grants under this subsection.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IX, §911, as added Pub. L. 106–129, §2(a), Dec. 6, 1999, 113 Stat. 1656.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 299b, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IX, §911, as added Pub. L. 101–239, title VI, §6103(a), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2192; amended Pub. L. 102–410, §5(b), Oct. 13, 1992, 106 Stat. 2097, related to establishment of Office of the Forum for Quality and Effectiveness in Health Care, prior to the general amendment of this subchapter by Pub. L. 106–129.

Another prior section 299b, act July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title IX, §902, as added Oct. 6, 1965, Pub. L. 89–239, §2, 79 Stat. 927; amended Oct. 15, 1968, Pub. L. 90–574, title I, §103, 82 Stat. 1005; Oct. 30, 1970, Pub. L. 91–515, title I, §§104, 111(b), 84 Stat. 1299, 1301, defined terms for purposes of this subchapter, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 99–117, §12(d), Oct. 7, 1985, 99 Stat. 495.
#### § 237.06 Transferability of Guarantee; Note Register.

A Noteholder may assign, transfer or pledge an Eligible Note to any Person. Any such assignment, transfer or pledge shall be effective on the date that the name of the new Noteholder is entered on the Note Register. USAID shall be entitled to treat the Persons in whose names the Eligible Notes are registered as the owners thereof for all purposes of this Guarantee and USAID shall not be affected by notice to the contrary.
#### Max Goodman v. Kean-Jones Company.

Application denied, with ten dollars costs, and stay vacated. Order signed. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Smith, Page and Greenbaum, JJ.
#### § 240.7 Fiscal Agent obligations.

Failure of the Fiscal Agent to perform any of its obligations pursuant to the Fiscal Agency Agreement shall not impair any Noteholder's rights under this Guarantee, but may be the subject of action for damages against the Fiscal Agent by USAID as a result of such failure or neglect. A Noteholder may appoint the Fiscal Agent to make demand for payment on its behalf under this Guarantee.
§ 214.52 Administrative review of other alleged non-compliance. With regard to other alleged non-compliance with the Act, OMB Circular A-63, or this regulation, the following procedures are to be used: ( a ) Advisory committee members or other aggrieved individuals or organizations must file a written complaint which contains specific information regarding the alleged non-compliance.
( b ) The written complaint must be addressed to the Administrator or Deputy Administrator, Agency for International Development, 21st and Virginia Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20523.
( c ) The complaint must be filed within thirty (30) days after the date of the alleged non-compliance.
( d ) The complaint will be considered by the Administrator or Deputy Administrator with the advice and assistance of the General Counsel and the A.I.D. Advisory Committee Management Office.
( e ) Written notice of the disposition of the complaint shall be provided to the complainant within thirty (30) days of the date the complaint was received by the Agency.
#### Louis Mazzella, Individually, and as Assignee of Jessie Mazzella, Appellant, v. American Home Construction Company, Inc., Respondent

Order, entered on October 24, 1960, granting defendant’s motion to direct plaintiff to consummate a settlement of the action, unanimously reversed, on the law and on the facts, without costs, and the motion denied. The plaintiff’s attorney states unequivocally that he was without authority from his client to enter into any settlement agreement. He also states — and it is conceded — that at the time of the settlement discussions he unsuccessfully sought to contact and consult with his client. Failing in such attempt he states — and nothing in the record contradicts this statement — that he advised the court and his adversary that the settlement was made subject to his client’s approval. Such approval was not only never obtained but he states that the plaintiff affirmatively rejected the settlement. The client’s approval must be deemed to have been a condition precedent to the agreement becoming effective and absent such approval the settlement has no vitality. Moreover, it is clear that in the absence of authority to do so an attorney may not settle his client’s claim *(Countryman*v. *Breen,*241 App. Div. 392, affd. 268 N. Y. 643; *Schneider*v. *Abrams,*228 App. Div. 1). From this record it appears that the plaintiff never authorized nor approved *911the settlement and it may not now be enforced. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
1

MEMORANDUM 

To: Sewage Sludge Incinerator Docket 

From: Amy Hambrick, US EPA 

Date: July 2010 

Subject: Port Washington Sewage Sludge Incinerator (New York State) 

I spoke to Shawn Snee of the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NY DEC) 

to confirm that the Port Washington Sewage Sludge Incinerator (SSI) unit was currently offline as 

of December 2009. A representative from the Port Washington SSI facility called me spring 2010 

to inquire to the upcoming SSI rulemaking proposal. The representative had mentioned that the 

Port Washington unit was offline. I verified with Mr. Snee, of NY DEC that Port Washington 

SSI unit was currently shut down do to a fire in late 2009. Mr. Snee was unable to confirm if the 

unit will come back online. I informed Mr. Snee that EPA was working on a SSI rulemaking to 

be proposed soon and that EPA looks forward to receiving any comments during the proposal’s 

public comment period.
```

[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 27 (Tuesday, February 10, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 6319]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2787]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[FEMA-1498-DR]

California; Amendment No. 5 to Notice of a Major Disaster 
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Emergency Preparedness and 
Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the 
State of California (FEMA-1498-DR), dated October 27, 2003, and related 
determinations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 3, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Magda Ruiz, Recovery Division, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2705.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that for this 
disaster, the incident period is reopened as October 21, 2003, through 
and including March 31, 2004. During the expanded incident period, only 
those areas within the designated areas specifically determined by the 
Federal Coordinating Officer to be damaged or adversely affected as a 
direct result of the compromised watershed conditions and fire-
generated debris caused by the wildfires will be considered eligible 
for assistance on a case-by-case basis.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) 
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community 
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund Program; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services Program; 97.034, 
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management 
Assistance; 97.048, Individual and Household Housing; 97.049, 
Individual and Household Disaster Housing Operations; 97.050 
Individual and Household Program--Other Needs, 97.036, Public 
Assistance Grants; 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.)

Michael D. Brown,
Under Secretary, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Department of 
Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 04-2787 Filed 2-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-10-P
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 710

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 710 appear at 84 FR 37752, Aug. 2, 2019.

#### § 710.12 Finding of violation.

The President of DFC shall take appropriate action referred to in § 710.13 in the case of an individual who is found in violation of the statutory or regulatory post-employment restrictions, after a final administrative decision.
§ 233.05 Non-impairment of the Guarantee. The full faith and credit of the United States of America is pledged to the performance of this Guarantee. The Guarantee shall be unconditional, and shall not be affected or impaired by: ( a ) Any defect in the authorization, execution, delivery or enforceability of any agreement or other document executed by a Noteholder, USAID, the Fiscal Agent or the Borrower in connection with the transactions contemplated by this Guarantee or
( b ) The suspension or termination of the program pursuant to which USAID is authorized to guarantee the Eligible Notes. This non-impairment of the guarantee provision shall not, however, be operative with respect to any loss arising out of fraud or misrepresentation for which the claiming Noteholder is responsible or of which it had knowledge at the time it became a Noteholder.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsTESS Data Release Notes: Sector 10, DR14This release note discusses the science data products produced by the Science Processing Operations Center at Ames Research Center from Sector 10 observations made with the TESS spacecraft and cameras as a means to document instrument performance and data characteristics.Document ID20190026633Acquisition SourceAmes Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsFausnaugh, Michael M.*(Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, United States)*Burke, Christopher J.*(Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, United States)*Caldwell, Douglas A.*(Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Inst. Mountain View, CA, United States)*Jenkins, Jon M.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Smith, Jeffrey C.*(Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Inst. Mountain View, CA, United States)*Twicken, Joseph D.*(Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Inst. Mountain View, CA, United States)*Vanderspek, Roland*(Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, United States)*Doty, John P.*(Noqsi Aerospace Ltd. Billerica, MA, United States)*Ting, Eric B.*(NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA, United States)*Villesenor, Joel S.*(Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Cambridge, MA, United States)*Date AcquiredJune 25, 2019Publication DateJune 6, 2019Subject CategoryAstrophysicsReport/Patent NumberARC-E-DAA-TN69634NASA/TM-2019-220220Funding Number(s)WBS: 985788.04.02.03CONTRACT_GRANT: NNG14FC03CCONTRACT_GRANT: NNX17AK23ADistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.KeywordsTESS Missionexoplanetstransit surveyAvailable DownloadsNameType20190026633.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

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

In connection with the Annual Report of APW Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-K
for the year ended August 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard D. Carroll, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S)1350, as
adopted pursuant to (S)906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best
of my knowledge:

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

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


/s/ Richard D. Carroll
---------------------------
Richard D. Carroll
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
December 27, 2002

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Order entered April 28, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00333-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF N.K.C., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 254th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-18-21825

ORDER

Before the Court are appellant’s written verification that he has requested the 

reporter’s record and court reporter Janet Saavedra’s letter informing the Court the 

record was taken by LaToya Young-Martinez. Accordingly, we ORDER Ms. 

Young-Martinez to file the reporter’s record no later than May 18, 2020.

We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. 

Saavedra; Ms. Young-Martinez; and, the parties.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN RE: 

CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION

SECURITIES LITIGATION.

This Document Relates

To All Cases. /

No. C 08-01510 WHA

REQUEST FOR GUIDANCE

RE VOLUMINOUS MOTIONS

Both sides filed many summary judgment motions. The Court has been patiently working

its way through them and has now issued four separate orders on them. By 9:00 A.M. FRIDAY,

APRIL 9, please advise the Court which, if any, remaining motions counsel truly needs an order

on, even if abbreviated, with one sentence each explaining why it cannot wait until the charging

conference or at least until the final pretrial conference. Do not use this as an opportunity to

submit more argument or authorities or evidence. One page will do. 

Dated: April 8, 2010. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:08-cv-01733-WHA Document 52 Filed 04/08/10 Page 1 of 1