alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2023211EN.01000801.xml

| 16.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/8

---

Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (1))

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 211/04)

Decision granting an authorisation

| Reference of the decision (2) | Date of decision | Substance name | Holder of the authorisation | Authorisation number | Authorised use | Date of expiry of review period | Reasons for the decision |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| C(2023) 3646 | 9 June 2023 | 4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol, ethoxylated (‘4-tert-OPnEO’)
  EC No.-; CAS No.- | Alexion Pharma International Operations Unlimited Company, College Business & Technology Park, Blanchardstown, D15 R925, Dublin 15, Ireland | REACH/23/18/0 | Industrial use for virus inactivation in the manufacture of Andexanet alfa for treatment of adult patients treated with a direct factor Xa (FXa) inhibitor when reversal of anticoagulation is needed due to life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding | 31 December 2030 | In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health and the environment from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies. |

Reference of the decision (2)

Date of decision

Substance name

Holder of the authorisation

Authorisation number

Authorised use

Date of expiry of review period

Reasons for the decision

C(2023) 3646

9 June 2023

4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol, ethoxylated (‘4-tert-OPnEO’)

EC No.-; CAS No.-

Alexion Pharma International Operations Unlimited Company, College Business & Technology Park, Blanchardstown, D15 R925, Dublin 15, Ireland

REACH/23/18/0

Industrial use for virus inactivation in the manufacture of Andexanet alfa for treatment of adult patients treated with a direct factor Xa (FXa) inhibitor when reversal of anticoagulation is needed due to life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding

31 December 2030

In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socio-economic benefits outweigh the risk to human health and the environment from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies.

---

(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: Authorisation (europa.eu).

---
Exhibit 31.2.  CERTIFICATION  I, S. E. Parks, certify that:  1. I have reviewed this report of Questar Pipeline Company on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2007;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3. [intentionally omitted];  4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and we have:  a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting.  5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):  a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.    November 6, 2008 /s/S. E. Parks S. E. Parks Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### § 904.16 [Reserved]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA PR 23-0232

IN RE MOTION FOR ADMISSION UPON UNIFORM BAR EXAMINATION SCORE TRANSFER 

# FILEU SEP 1 9 2023 Bovven Greenwood Clerk of Sup ,Drne Court StStFf of Montana ORDER

Elizabeth M. O'Connell has filed a petition for admission to the State Bar of Montana pursuant to Rule IV oftheRules forAdmission tothe Bar ofthe State ofMontana, governing admission upon Uniform Bar Examination score transfer. The Bar Admissions Administrator ofthe State Bar ofMontana has informed the Court that the Commission on Character and Fitness has certified that O'Connell has provided the necessary documentation and has satisfied the requirements prerequisite to admission under Rule IV ofthe Rules for Admission to the State Bar ofMontana. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that upon payment of any application fees and competition of any other processing requirements as set forth by the Bar Admissions Administrator, Elizabeth M. O'Connell may be sworn in to the practice oflaw in the State ofMontana. Arrangements for swearing-in may be made by contacting the office ofthe Clerk ofthe Montana Supreme Court. The Clerk is directed to provide copies ofthis order to the Petitioner and the State Bar ofMontana. *s
. DATED this l9, day ofSeptember, 2023. ,# / v gie)r ChiefJustice A‘,6)1#(4_,.. 09/19/2023

Case Number: PR 23-0232

# 4Poi M .414., Justices

2
#### § 108.3 Definition.

*Secretarial Designee Program.* The program established under section 1074(c) to create by regulation an eligibility for health care services in military medical treatment facilities (MTFs) as well as dental treatment facilities for individuals who have no such eligibility under 10 U.S.C. chapter 55.
### §3971. Definitions

For the purposes of this subchapter:

#### (1) Policy

The term "policy" means any individual contract for whole, endowment, universal, or term life insurance (other than group term life insurance coverage), including any benefit in the nature of such insurance arising out of membership in any fraternal or beneficial association which—

(A) provides that the insurer may not—

(i) decrease the amount of coverage or require the payment of an additional amount as premiums if the insured engages in military service (except increases in premiums in individual term insurance based upon age); or

(ii) limit or restrict coverage for any activity required by military service; and

(B) is in force not less than 180 days before the date of the insured's entry into military service and at the time of application under this subchapter.

#### (2) Premium

The term "premium" means the amount specified in an insurance policy to be paid to keep the policy in force.

#### (3) Insured

The term "insured" means a servicemember whose life is insured under a policy.

#### (4) Insurer

The term "insurer" includes any firm, corporation, partnership, association, or business that is chartered or authorized to provide insurance and issue contracts or policies by the laws of a State or the United States.

(Oct. 17, 1940, ch. 888, title IV, §401, as added Pub. L. 108–189, §1, Dec. 19, 2003, 117 Stat. 2851.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 541 of the former Appendix to this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 401 of act Oct. 17, 1940, ch. 888, art. IV, 54 Stat. 1183; Oct. 6, 1942, ch. 581, §13, 56 Stat. 774; Pub. L. 102–12, §9(12), Mar. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 40, related to persons entitled to benefits, applications, and amount of insurance protected, prior to the general amendment of this Act by Pub. L. 108–189. See section 3972 of this title.

Provisions similar to this section were contained in section 400 of act Oct. 17, 1940, ch. 888, art. IV, 54 Stat. 1183; Oct. 6, 1942, ch. 581, §13, 56 Stat. 773; July 11, 1956, ch. 570, §1, 70 Stat. 528; Pub. L. 102–12, §9(11), Mar. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 40, prior to the general amendment of this Act by Pub. L. 108–189.

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

#### Effective Date

Section applicable to any case not final before Dec. 19, 2003, see section 3 of Pub. L. 108–189, set out as a note under section 3901 of this title.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-7248

STEVEN CHARLES WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

MONIQUE EPPERSON, Medical Supervisor,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (CA-95-42)

Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 17, 1996

Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Steven Charles Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Mark Ralph Davis,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying

relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. Williams v. Epperson, No. CA-95-42 (E.D. Va. Aug. 8, 1995).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
October 4, 2011

MEMORANDUM

From: William H. Maxwell EPA/SPPD/ESG (D243-01)

To: Docket Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234

Subject: Meeting with ISO’s

Attendees :

Joel Beauvais, EPA/OGC/IO Kellie Ortega, EPA/OECA/OCE/AED Philip Brooks, EPA/OECA/OCE/AED Ellen Kurlansky, EPA/OAR/OAA/OPAR Eric Wilkinson, ISO-New England* Mollie Lampe, NY ISO* Paul Sotkiewicz, PJM* Jennifer Tribulski, PJM* Gary Helm, PJM* Craig Glazer, PJM Kurt Bilas, MISO Michael Deselle, SPP* Matt Morais, ERCOT* Warren Lasher, ERCOT*

* by phone

Discussion :

A general discussion was held of the comments submitted by the RTO’s on the proposed Mercury and Air Toxics Standards.
#### VANDERBEEK, Appellant, v. COLE, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

November 20, 1903.)

Action by Samuel H. Vanderbeek against Andrew N. Cole.

No opinion. Judgment of the Municipal Court affirmed, by default, with costs.
§ 886.25 How can I appeal a decision to reduce, suspend, or terminate my grant? ( a ) Within 30 days of our decision to reduce, suspend, or terminate a grant, you may appeal the decision to the Director. ( 1 ) You must include in your appeal a statement of the decision being appealed and the facts that you believe justify a reversal or modification of the decision.
( 2 ) The Director must decide the appeal within 30 days of receipt.
( b ) Within 30 days of a decision by the Director to reduce, suspend, or terminate a grant, you may appeal the decision to the Department of the Interior's Office of Hearings and Appeals. You must include in the appeal a statement of the decision being appealed and the facts that you believe justify a reversal or modification of the decision.
#### Barbara Bowman, Respondent, v. Leonard Bowman, Appellant.

Order unanimously reversed, without costs of this appeal to either party, and matter remitted to Special Term for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum. Memorandum: The custodial provisions of the annulment decree were changed without any common-law proofs being taken. The custody of children should not be determined on the basis of recriminatory and controverted affidavits, but the court should make such a determination only after *858a full and plenary hearing and inquiry. (15 N. Y. Jur., Domestic Relations, § 357, p. 561; *Fernandez*v. *Fernandez,*282 App. Div. 1043; *Matter of Uhlan*v. *Uhlan,*283 App. Div. 1013; *People ex rel. Kenny*v. *Kenny,*277 App. Div. 578; *Radeff*v. *Radeff,*272 App. Div. 582; *Maxson*v. *Maxson,*271 App. Div. 1044.) (Appeal from order of Onondaga Special Term amending a judgment of March 16, 1962 permitting plaintiff, as mother, to take minor child to California to live and except that visitation is limited to mother’s domicile in California.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, MeClusky, Henry and Noonan, JJ.
### §4111. Payments to certain members of religious orders

In any case in which any money is payable as a result of the enactment of this subchapter to any person who is prevented from accepting such money by the rules, regulations, or customs of the church or the religious order or organization of which he is a member, such money shall be paid, upon the request of such person, to such church or to such religious order or organization.

(July 3, 1948, ch. 826, title I, §14, 62 Stat. 1247; Pub. L. 87–846, title I, §102, Oct. 22, 1962, 76 Stat. 1107.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This subchapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this title", meaning title I of act July 3, 1948, ch. 826, 62 Stat. 1240, which is classified principally to this subchapter. For complete classification of title I to the Code, see Tables.

#### Codification

Section was formerly classified to section 2013 of the former Appendix to this title prior to editorial reclassification and renumbering as this section.

#### Amendments

1962—Pub. L. 87–846 made technical amendment to reference in original act which appears in text as reference to this subchapter.

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

#### Transfer of Functions

For provisions transferring Foreign Claims Settlement Commission of the United States to Department of Justice, as a separate agency, see section 1622a et seq. of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Transfer of Functions

War Claims Commission, including offices of its members, abolished and functions of Commission and of members, officers, and employees thereof transferred to Foreign Claims Settlement Commission of the United States by Reorg. Plan No. 1 of 1954, §§2, 4, eff. July 1, 1954, 19 F.R. 3985, 68 Stat. 1279, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees. See, also, section 4101 of this title and notes thereunder.
#### CLINTON et al. v. BOECKEL, City Treasurer.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

January 20, 1903.)

In the matter of the application of Spencer Clinton and another, as, etc., against Adam Boeekel, treasurer of the city of Buffalo, N. Y.

PER CURIAM.

Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Held, that it is not intended by this decision to pass upon the question whether the payment of seven-ninths of the total tax involved operates as a release of any portion of the premises assessed from the lien of the unpaid balance of the tax.
132 STAT. 340 PUBLIC LAW 115–134—MAR. 16, 2018 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 452: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: 

Vol. 163 (2017): Oct. 10, 11, considered and passed House. 

Vol. 164 (2018): Mar. 7, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 115–134 

115th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 324 West 

Saint Louis Street in Pacific, Missouri, as the ‘‘Specialist Jeffrey L. White, Jr. 

Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SPECIALIST JEFFREY L. WHITE, JR. POST OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 324 West Saint Louis Street in Pacific, Missouri, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Specialist Jeffrey L. White, 

Jr. Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Specialist Jeffrey L. White, Jr. Post Office’’. 

Approved March 16, 2018. 

Mar. 16, 2018 

[H.R. 452]
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 9967 

To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to permit States to use 

funds made available under such Act to improve the administration 

of elections for the physical security of polling places and poll workers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 11, 2024 

Mr. GOTTHEIMER (for himself and Mr. BACON) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to permit 

States to use funds made available under such Act to 

improve the administration of elections for the physical 

security of polling places and poll workers. 

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 ‘‘Protect Our Local 

5 workers Act’’ or the ‘‘POL Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 9967 IH

1 SEC. 2. USE OF FUNDS UNDER HAVA FOR PHYSICAL SECU2 RITY OF POLLING PLACES AND POLL WORK3 ERS. 

4 (a) AUTHORIZING USE OF PAYMENTS.—Section 

5 101(b)(1) of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (52 

6 U.S.C. 20901(b)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the 

7 following new subparagraph: 

8 ‘‘(I) Ensuring the physical security of elec9 tion offices, including polling places, and elec10 tion workers, including poll workers.’’. 

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

12 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to funds made 

13 available to States under the Help America Vote Act of 

14 2002 at any time before or after the date of the enactment 

15 of this Act. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
#### Graney Development Corp. et al., Appellants, v J. Robert Taksen et al., Respondents. (Action No. 1.)

Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: We affirm Special Term’s dismissal pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd [a], par 7) of the third cause of action in the amended complaint purporting to allege the breach of an implied agreement on the part of the defendant bank not to divulge credit information pertaining to plaintiff, one of its borrowers, for the reasons stated by Special Term in its memorandum. *(Graney Dev. Corp. v Taksen,*92 Mise 2d 764.) We affirm the dismissal of the fourth cause of action based on negligence of the bank and its employee in allegedly imparting erroneous credit information. Such communications by banks are protected by a qualified privilege and there is no malice or bad faith alleged (see *Moore v Manufacturers’ Nat. Bank of Troy,*123 NY 420; *Lewis v Chapman,*16 NY 369; *Sewall v Catlin,*3 Wend 291; *Commonwealth Motor Parts v Bank of Nova Scotia,*44 AD2d 375; *Ritchie v Arnold,*79 111 App 406; Ann. 92 ALR2d 900; Ann. 40 ALR3d 1049; and see, generally, *A. B. C. Needlecraft Co. v Dunn & Bradstreet,*245 F2d 775; *Ormsby v Douglass,*37 NY 477). (Appeal from order of Monroe Supreme Court— partial summary judgment.) Present—Moule, J. P., Cardamone, Simons, Dillon and Hancock, Jr., JJ.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                             5
       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     Mar-02-1997         
<PERIOD-START>                        Mar-04-1996
<PERIOD-END>                          Jun-02-1996
<CASH>                                $74,765
<SECURITIES>                          $0
<RECEIVABLES>                         $268,895
<ALLOWANCES>                          $30,000
<INVENTORY>                           $5,570,239
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      $6,939,403
<PP&E>                                $17,148,109
<DEPRECIATION>                        $3,341,241
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        $22,146,268
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 $8,951,238
<BONDS>                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<COMMON>                              62,646
<OTHER-SE>                            $18,248,286
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          $22,146,268
<SALES>                               $13,538,008
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      $13,538,008
<CGS>                                 $8,113,439
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         $8,113,439
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      $4,824,954
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      $0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    $178,021
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       $344,259
<INCOME-TAX>                          $14,006
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   $344,259
<DISCONTINUED>                        $0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       $0
<CHANGES>                             $0
<NET-INCOME>                          $330,253
<EPS-PRIMARY>                         $0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                         $0.10
        


</TABLE>