alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 23, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Page 84020]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28447]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail, First-Class Package Service, and 
Parcel Select Service Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 23, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 11, 2020, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail, First-Class Package Service, and 
Parcel Select Service Contract 2 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2021-45, CP2021-46.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2020-28447 Filed 12-22-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-21

_____________________________

PAUL K. SAFFELL, Husband,

Appellant,

v.

ELIZABETH D. SAFFELL, Wife,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

W. Gregg McCaulie, Judge.

May 17, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

MAKAR, WINOKUR, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Lester Makofka, Paola Parra Harris, and Mercedes BlasonAguilar of Parra Harris Law, PLLC, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Heather B. Quick and Autumn Warner of the Quick Law Group, 

Jacksonville, for Appellee.
#### § 1639.5 Impartiality.

Boards may not give precedence to any religious organization or school over another, and all are to be given equal consideration.
#### § 77.1100 Fire protection; training and organization.

Firefighting facilities and equipment shall be provided commensurate with the potential fire hazards at each structure, enclosure and other facility (including custom coal preparation) at the mine and the employees at such facilities shall be instructed and trained annually in the use of such firefighting facilities and equipment.
###### Editorial Note on Part 75

#### Editorial Note:

The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

#### § 75.1402-2 Tests of signaling systems.

Signaling systems used for communication between shaft stations and the hoist room shall be tested daily.
EXHIBIT 32
                                                                      ----------


                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, the undersigned, Louis P. Scheps, the President and
Chief Executive Officer and Jeffery A. Baird, the Chief Financial Officer of CAS
Medical Systems, Inc., (the "issuer"), do hereby certify that the report on Form
10-KSB accompanying this certification (the "report") fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that information contained in the report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the issuer.



/s/ Louis P. Scheps
-----------------------------
Louis P. Scheps
Chairman of the Board, President and
Chief Executive Officer
CAS Medical Systems, Inc.
March 28, 2005


/s/ Jeffery A. Baird
-----------------------------
Jeffery A. Baird
Chief Financial Officer
CAS Medical Systems, Inc.
March 28, 2005
### §101937. Savings provision

Nothing in this subchapter shall modify the terms or conditions of any concessions contracts awarded under subchapter II or the ability of the National Park Service to enter into concessions contracts under the National Park Service Concessions Management Improvement Act of 1998 (title IV of Public Law 105–391) including the use of leaseholder surrender interest.

(Added Pub. L. 114–289, title VII, §701, Dec. 16, 2016, 130 Stat. 1493.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

The National Park Service Concessions Management Improvement Act of 1998, referred to in text, is title IV of Pub. L. 105–391, Nov. 13, 1998, 112 Stat. 3503. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title of 1998 Act note set out under section 100101 of this title and Tables.
### §3376. Regulations

The President may prescribe regulations for the administration of this subchapter.

(Added Pub. L. 91–648, title IV, §402(a), Jan. 5, 1971, 84 Stat. 1925.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section effective sixty days after Jan. 5, 1971, see section 404 of Pub. L. 91–648, set out as a note under section 3371 of this title.

#### **Executive Documents**

#### Ex. Ord. No. 11589. Delegation of Functions to Office of Personnel Management

Ex. Ord. No. 11589, Apr. 1, 1971, 36 F.R. 6343, as amended by Ex. Ord. No. 12107, Dec. 28, 1978, 44 F.R. 1055, provided:

By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, and as President of the United States, it is ordered as follows:

Section 1. The Office of Personnel Management is hereby designated and empowered to exercise, without the approval, ratification, or other action of the President, the following:

(a) The authority of the President under section 3376 of title 5 of the United States Code [this section] to prescribe regulations for the administration of subchapter VI, "Assignments to and from States," of chapter 33 of that title [this chapter].

(b) The authority of the President under section 205 (a)(4) of the Federal Civil Defense Act of 1950, as amended ([former] 50 U.S.C. App. 2286(a)(4)), and as affected by Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1958 (72 Stat. 1799) [set out in the Appendix to this title], relating to the establishment and maintenance of personnel standards on the merit basis.

Sec. 2. To the extent that section 1(b) of this order is inconsistent with the provisions of Executive Order No. 10952 of July 20, 1961, as amended, section 1(b) shall control.
### [§§701 to 706. Renumbered §§1301 to 1306]
# C_2011331EN.01001502.xml

| 12.11.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 331/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 331/15

---

Judgment of the General Court of 27 September 2011 — Gul Ahmed Textile Mills v Council

(Case T-199/04) (1)

1

(Dumping - Imports of cotton bed linen originating in Pakistan - Injury - Causal link)

2011/C 331/26

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd (Karachi, Pakistan) (represented by: L. Ruessmann, lawyer, with an address for service in Luxembourg (Luxembourg))

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J. P. Hix and B. Driessen, Agents, and by G. Berrisch, lawyer)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented by T. Scharf and K. Talabér-Ritz, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 397/2004 of 2 March 2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan (OJ 2004 L 66, p. 1), in so far as it concerns the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Council Regulation (EC) No 397/2004 of 2 March 2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan in so far as it concerns Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Council Regulation (EC) No 397/2004 of 2 March 2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan in so far as it concerns Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd;

| 2. | Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Gul Ahmed Textile Mills; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by Gul Ahmed Textile Mills;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 217, 28.8.2004.

1

---
KAFOURY, ARMSTRONG & CO.

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

                                          "taking care of Nevada for 60 years."

                                November 6, 2002


Mr. Laus Abdo, President/CFO
Innovative Gaming Corporation of America
333 Orville Wright Court
Las Vegas, NV 89119

Dear Laus:

     As discussed in Note 7 to the financial statements for the nine months
ended September 30, 2002, the Company changed its method of accounting for
operating revenue. The Company will report revenue on the expiration of any
"Right of Return" period, which is a change from the recording of revenue upon
shipment of product.

     As you have requested, we have discussed with you the circumstances,
business judgment, and all other underlying factors that contributed to your
decision to make this accounting change.

     Based on our review of the attendant circumstances and discussions with
management, we concur that the newly adopted accounting principle of revenue
recognition as described in Note 7 is preferable under the circumstances.

     Because we have not audited any financial statements of the Company as of
any date or for any period subsequent to December 31, 2001, we do not express an
opinion on the financial statements for the nine months ended September 30,
2002.


                                Very Truly yours,

                                /s/ Richard Schlingheyde

                                Richard Schlingheyde


CARSON CITY
ELKO
FALLON
LAS VEGAS
RENO
WINNEMUCCA
YERINGTON

RS:bh


6140 PLUMAS STREER, RENO, NEVADA 89509-6060

775.689.9100 M:775.689.9299 wwwkafourycom
### SUBCHAPTER II—AWARDS FOR COST SAVINGS DISCLOSURES

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1981—Pub. L. 97–35, title XVII, §1703(a), Aug. 13, 1981, 95 Stat. 755, added subchapter II.
Exhibit 23.1 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm








As the independent registered public accountants of The First Bancorp, Inc., we hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No. 333-175722) on Form S-3 and the registration statement (No. 333-167014) on Form S-8 of our report dated March 8, 2013, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of The First Bancorp, Inc. and Subsidiary as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, and the related consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income, changes in shareholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2012, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, which report appears in the December 31, 2012 annual report on Form 10-K of The First Bancorp, Inc.





/s/ Berry Dunn McNeil & Parker, LLC


Portland, Maine


December 1, 2015
#### § 924.20 Approval of Mississippi abandoned mine land reclamation plans.

The Mississippi abandoned mine land reclamation plan as submitted on April 5, 2006, and June 11, 2007, and as revised is approved. Copies of the approved plan are available at:

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Birmingham Field Office, 135 Gemini Circle, Suite 215, Homewood, Alabama 35209

Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, Office of Geology, 2380 Highway 80 West, Jackson, Mississippi 39289-1307

[72 FR 54832, Sept. 27, 2007]
#### Rozalie Rasberry, Respondent, v. Scarsdale Bus Corporation, Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated January 5, 1960, entered on a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff. Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Nolan, P. J., Beldock and Pette, JJ., concur; Ughetta and Christ, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse the judgment and to grant a new trial on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence.
Appeal No. 77-31.

#### State *v.*Michael Driscoll.

*Julius C. Michaelson,*Attorney General, for plaintiff.

*William F. Reilly,*Public Defender, *Barbara Hurst, John A. MacFadyen III, James Ruggerio,*Asst. Public Defenders, for defendant.

The defendant’s motion to withdraw his appeal is granted.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 9974 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to expand the health care benefits 

available for Gold Star surviving spouses. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 11, 2024 

Ms. KAPTUR (for herself and Mr. BACON) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to expand the health 

care benefits available for Gold Star surviving spouses. 

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 ‘‘Gold Star Spouses 

5 Health Care Enhancement Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF HEALTH CARE BENEFITS FOR GOLD 

7 STAR SURVIVING SPOUSES. 

8 (a) MEDICAL BENEFITS.—Section 1079(g) of title 

9 10, United States Code, is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 9974 IH

1 (1) in paragraph (2), by inserting ‘‘except as 

2 provided by paragraph (5),’’ after ‘‘benefits under 

3 paragraph (1),’’; and 

4 (2) by striking paragraph (5) and inserting the 

5 following: 

6 ‘‘(5)(A) A dependent described in subparagraph (B) 

7 shall not be subject to the three-year time limit specified 

8 in paragraph (2) with respect to eligibility for benefits 

9 under TRICARE Prime. 

10 ‘‘(B) A dependent described in this subparagraph is 

11 a dependent for purposes of section 1072 of this title by 

12 reason of being a surviving spouse of a member of the 

13 armed forces whose death is covered by section 1126.’’. 

14 (b) DENTAL BENEFITS.—Section 1076a(k) of such 

15 title is amended— 

16 (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘Such term’’ 

17 and inserting ‘‘Except as provided by paragraph (4), 

18 such term’’; and 

19 (2) by adding after paragraph (3) the following: 

20 ‘‘(4)(A) A dependent described in subparagraph (B) 

21 shall not be subject to the three-year time limit specified 

22 in paragraph (3). 

23 ‘‘(B) A dependent described in this subparagraph is 

24 a dependent for purposes of section 1072 of this title by 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 9974 IH

1 reason of being a surviving spouse of a member of the 

2 armed forces whose death is covered by section 1126.’’. 

3 (c) APPLICATION.—The amendments made by this 

4 section shall apply with respect to a surviving spouse of 

5 a member of the Armed Forces whose death is covered 

6 by section 1126 of title 10, United States Code, regardless 

7 of whether such death occurred before the date of the en8 actment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
#### § 1701.15 Fees.

ODNI shall charge fees for duplication of records under the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, in the same way in which it will charge for duplication of records under § 1700.7(g), ODNI's regulation implementing the fee provision of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.
# C_2009006EN.01001902.xml

| 10.1.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.1.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/19

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Seventh Chamber) of 13 November 2008 — Italian Republic v Commission

(Case T-224/04) (1)

1

(EAGGF - ‘Guarantee’ Section - Expenditure excluded from Community financing - Aid for the processing of tomatoes and production of olive oil)

(2009/C 6/38)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Italian Republic (represented by: M. Fiorilli, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: L. Visaggio and C. Cattabriga, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Action for partial annulment of Commission Decision 2003/536/EC of 22 July 2003 excluding from Community financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the ‘Guarantee’ Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) (OJ 2003 L 184, p. 42) to the extent that it excludes certain expenditure by the Italian Republic in the financial years 1999 to 2002.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the action;

| 2. | orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 304, 13.12.2003 (formerly Case C-430/03).

1

---
1 The Honorable Harry F. Barnes, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Bobby E. Shepherd, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 02-4112

___________ James Kenneth Anderson, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Western * District of Arkansas. Judy C. Langley, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: April 14, 2003 Filed: May 12, 2003

___________ Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, BYE, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Arkansas inmate James Kenneth Anderson appeals the district court’s 1 preservice dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). We grant Anderson’s motion to appeal in forma pauperis, and we leave to the district court the details of calculating the initial partial appellate filing fee, and the collection-2- of the balance of the appellate filing fee in installments. See Henderson v. Norris , 129 F.3d 481, 484-85 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam). Having carefully reviewed the record, see Moore v. Sims , 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (de novo standard of review), we summarily affirm the dismissal of the action. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a). A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
### §5366. Appeals

(a)(1) In the case of the termination of any benefits available to an employee under this subchapter on the grounds such employee declined a reasonable offer of a position the grade or pay of which was equal to or greater than his retained grade or pay, such termination may be appealed to the Office of Personnel Management under procedures prescribed by the Office.

(2) Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to affect the right of any employee to appeal—

(A) under section 5112(b) or 5346(c) of this title, or otherwise, any reclassification of a position; or

(B) under procedures prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, any reduction-in-force action.

(b) For purposes of any appeal procedures (other than those described in subsection (a) of this section) or any grievance procedure negotiated under the provisions of chapter 71 of this title—

(1) any action which is the basis of an individual's entitlement to benefits under this subchapter, and

(2) any termination of any such benefits under this subchapter,

shall not be treated as appealable under such appeals procedures or grievable under such grievance procedure.

(Added Pub. L. 95–454, title VIII, §801(a)(1), Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1221.)
(December 5, 1978)

#### In the Matter of Kenneth Gribetz, as District Attorney of Rockland County, Petitioner, v Harry Edelstein, as Judge of the County Court, Respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 by Kenneth Gribetz, the District Attorney of Rockland County, to prohibit the respondent, a County Court Judge, from accepting a guilty plea, without the consent of the petitioner, in the case of *People v Lane,*now pending before him, and to compel respondent to vacate any plea already taken in such case. Petition granted, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and respondent is directed to vacate the plea of guilty already accepted by him from the defendant Lane. Clifford Lane and another were charged in a four-count indictment, with the crimes of burglary in the third degree, grand larceny in the third degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree. At a plea bargaining conference, an Assistant District Attorney agreed to accept guilty pleas from each defendant to burglary in the third degree in full satisfaction of the indictment; thereafter, Lane stated that he wanted to accept the plea bargain offered; his codefendant did not want to accept the offer. It was the People’s position that unless both defendants, who were eligible for youthful offender treatment, accepted the plea bargain offered, the offer would be withdrawn and consent to the plea withheld. The respondent accepted Lane’s plea without the People’s consent. A District Attorney may dictate the terms under which he will agree to consent to accept a guilty plea and where his terms are not met, he may withhold such consent; the withholding of such consent by statutory mandate renders the court without authority to accept a plea to anything less than the entire indictment (see CPL 220.10; *Matter of McDonald v Sobel,*272 App Div 455, affd 297 NY 679; *People v Evans,*18 AD2d 1018; *Matter of Cosgrove v Kubiniec,*56 AD2d 709). Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Gulotta and Shapiro, JJ., concur.