alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 200.210 Amount of penalties and assessments. ( a ) Penalties. 1 ( 1 ) Except as provided in this section, the DHA may impose a penalty of not more than $20,504 for each individual violation that is subject to a determination under this subpart. 1 The penalty amounts in this section are updated annually, as adjusted in accordance with the Federal Civil Monetary Penalty Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-140), as amended by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (section 701 of Pub. L. 114-74). Annually adjusted amounts are published at 32 CFR part 269. The maximum penalty amount is based on the most recent statutory adjustment included in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 and includes the cost of living multiplier for 2019, based on the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) for the month of October 2018, not seasonally adjusted, is 1.02522, as indicated in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Memorandum M-19-04.
( 2 ) For each individual violation of § 200.200(b)(1), the DHA may impose a penalty of not more than $20,504 for each separately billable or non-separately-billable item or service provided, furnished, ordered, or prescribed by an excluded individual or entity.
( 3 ) The DHA may impose a penalty of not more than $100,522 for each false statement, omission, or misrepresentation of a material fact in violation of § 200.200(b)(3).
( 4 ) The DHA may impose a penalty of not more than $100,522 for each false record or statement in violation of § 200.200(b)(5).
( 5 ) The DHA may impose a penalty of not more than $20,504 for each item or service related to an overpayment that is not reported and returned in accordance with section 1128J(d) of the Act in violation of § 200.200(b)(4).
( 6 ) The DHA may impose a penalty of not more than $30,757 for each day of failure to grant timely access in violation of § 200.200(b)(6).
( b ) *Assessments.* ( 1 ) Except for violations of § 200.200(b)(1) and (3), the DHA may impose an assessment for each individual violation of § 200.200, of not more than 3 times the amount claimed for each item or service.
( 2 ) For violations of § 200.200(b)(1), the DHA may impose an assessment of not more than 3 times— ( i ) The amount claimed for each separately billable item or service provided, furnished, ordered, or prescribed by an excluded individual or entity; or
( ii ) The total costs (including salary, benefits, taxes, and other money or items of value) related to the excluded individual or entity incurred by the person that employs, contracts with, or otherwise arranges for an excluded individual or entity to provide, furnish, order, or prescribe a non-separately-billable item or service.
( 3 ) For violations of § 200.200(b)(3), the DHA may impose an assessment of not more than 3 times the total amount claimed for each item or service for which payment was made based upon the application containing the false statement, omission, or misrepresentation of material fact.
EXHIBIT 3.1.7

                           CERTIFICATE FOR

                   RENEWAL AND REVIVAL OF CHARTER

                                OF

                UNITED STATES BASKETBALL LEAGUE, INC.


UNITED STATES BASKETBALL LEAGUE, INC., a corporation organized under the laws of
Delaware, the certificate of incorporation of which was filed in the office of
the Secretary of State on the 29th day of May, 1984 and recorded in the office
of the Recorder of Deeds for Kent county, the charter of which was voided for
non-payment of taxes, now desires to procure a restoration, renewal and revival
of its charter, and hereby certified as follows:

1. The name of the corporation is:

       UNITED STATES BASKETBALL LEAGUE, INC.

2. Its registered office in the State of Delaware is located at United Corporate
Services, Inc., 15 East North Street, in the City of Dover, County of Kent,
State of Delaware 19901. The name of its registered agent at that address is
United Corporate Services, Inc.

3. The date when the restoration, renewal, and revival of the charter of this
company is to commence is the 28th day of February, 1997, same being prior to
the date of the expiration of the charter. This renewal and revival of the
charter of this corporation is to be perpetual.

4. This corporation was duly organized and carried in the business authorized by
its charter until the 1st day of March, 1997, at which time its charter became
inoperative and void for non-payment of taxes and this certificate for renewal
and revival is filed by authority of the duly elected directors of the
corporation in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, and in compliance with the provisions of Section 312 of
the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, as amended, providing for
the renewal, extension and restoration of charters, Daniel T. Meisenheimer, III,
the last authorized officer of UNITED STATES BASKETBALL LEAGUE, INC., has
hereunto set his hand to this certificate this 22nd day of May, 2000.

                                   By  /S/ Daniel T. Meisenheimer III
                                       Daniel T. Meisenheimer, III
                                       Chief Executive Officer
#### § 1802.31 Right of appeal.

A right of appeal is available to the ISCAP established pursuant to § 5.4 of this Order. Action by that body will be the subject of rules to be promulgated by the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO).
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Almars Elksnis, Appellant.

Order entered on April 7, 1961 unanimously affirmed. No opinion. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Valente and McNally, JJ.
!"
#$%&	&

&' 


 
()*(+*,- .

/(0"	
1(2
%((	


	

	
 !"
#$'

3+2- 45+/( 4,/( 3--/ 4!) 678

9

:;<=>?@ABCD?(EFDGH;<@IJHKGBF(LDDJ(MJBGD(M=;NDKFFB>GD OPQRSTUVW(XVYZV[QV\(]^_(`a]a

b

6*)c/(d(-2)7(

eKCCK<>(

/(f%&5&(-
+
(!( 
( %
( "g(((f-+! g(("((((%(
1%(&(


	h

(2(%(g#(	h
g(%
&%(%"(
%
%(g((%(&(
(	("%(%(&(

g((#g(1((-(((

i"(g(1%%(%&(	h
(%(	(%&((-(/(	h
(%((
("&g(
((

((f	(6%%( "((((j
(h%1j(
((
1(	&((&	((((	1
((


( 
( 
(,%&k(l%( 
(+%(,%( 
( %(%(+%(,g(
&((m%&%	(


(5g(,
g((%	((
1%((%&(	h
(%(	(/(
%(
(%	(%(&g(1%%(

%(g((( 
( %
(c1(
(
(
(%&(&(%(((&
(/(%	(


%((%%(

(&(%("(%&(	h
(
%"(%(	(((((

/(((%(f-+! ((((&
"(((
( 
(,%&k(((+%(fg(( 


0%((6%(5g(,
(/"((!
%(g( 
g(c
2
n(!
%(g(!(f
g(5()%&%(+
%(/"n(%&

opIqI(LEqrstM((u(((LIvwtIrL(ps@xEM(b(<y(b

/(f%&5&(-
+
(!( 
( %
(
"((!
%(g(%(!(f
g(5()%&%(+
%/"(

%(((%((&&
(/(
"(
1(1%%(%&(&(
(	h
(%(	(%&(-(z
 
((


{

 1((%(
%%(z6(-%{

	


	

	
 !"
#$%&	&

&' 

!
%()*(+*(,
((

-./012.3(

456! (((%(%((%(
(((7&((("(%(&(
(
%"*(8%%

(!( 9:5
(9(%(456! ((((
(((&(%(
%;%
%((
((("


9(
((	((<<(	;
(*((&(%((%("(
%(&
(((%"(
("*(
&


(%&(
((
%&%(&
"(%%
((
%(%&(
%(%"(((%((

9(!( 9:5("((	((
8(((%((&((
((((
((8"*((
(8

&(
%
(%*(%((%((=(
%((%"(8
(>(%(((8(%&((

&((((
%(%((((%((	( (*(
(%(?&*((&(((%
((
	%

%((
((((

(9(&*(8%%((	%*((%(%(%%%"(((@%( 
(6%

>%( 
( %(%(6%(>
((

A/BCD2E1FG(

9(456! ("((	%(%(%(
((
 
( 
(>%&=(
(%(%(%(%
(("

$
((H%(*(
((	%(%(
(((7&((!( 9:5
(9(&(&&(((((

((

(%&(%(
(
(%((&
(9(456! ("(
%(
8(	;
(((((	8	(

%(*(("(%&((((((( I>=(
(%
(%8


J

-/B.KEEC LMN00.2

I6IO:(>9( ,559 

PQRSS(T3U2.V

WXRJA(Y2.G/0E2

ZFNU.2(YEG

T[[NB.2(\-ZP(P]/33N[NB/0NEF3

^F]N30.G(\-ZP(P]/33N[NB/0NEF3

5_445  ( 
(+&(
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 9916 

To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study 

relating to 1–800–MEDICARE. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 4, 2024 

Ms. DE LA CRUZ (for herself, Mr. CORREA, Mr. NEHLS, and Mr. WILLIAMS

of New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 

Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within 

the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to 

conduct a study relating to 1–800–MEDICARE. 

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 ‘‘Improving Medicare 

5 Services Act of 2024’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 9916 IH

1 SEC. 2. DIRECTING THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE 

2 UNITED STATES TO CONDUCT A STUDY RE3 LATING TO 1-800-MEDICARE. 

4 Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment 

5 of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States 

6 shall conduct a study and submit to Congress a report 

7 on 1–800–MEDICARE. To the extent that data is avail8 able and reliable, such report shall include the following: 

9 (1) An analysis of customer wait times and 

10 overall satisfaction. 

11 (2) An analysis of staffing competency and 

12 staffing levels. 

13 (3) An analysis of contractor performance. 

14 (4) A description of any improvements or down15 grades in service areas previously studied in any 

16 prior report submitted by the Comptroller General. 

17 (5) Any recommendations for Congress or the 

18 Secretary of Health and Human Services relating to 

19 improving 1–800–MEDICARE. 

20 (6) A description of any actions taken by the 

21 Secretary of Health and Human Services or any 

22 contractor carrying out 1–800–MEDICARE in re23 sponse to previous recommendations relating to 1- 

24 800-MEDICARE provided by the Comptroller Gen25 eral. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk December 8, 2011 

# Order

December 8, 2011

Oral Arguments on Applications

Sup Ct No. 142842 Admire v Auto

- Owners Ins

Sup Ct No. 140401 Atkins v Suburban Mobility Authority

Sup Ct No. 142339 Cedroni Associates v Tomblin, Harburn Associates

Sup Ct No. 143329]

143348] Hill v Sears

143633]

Sup Ct No. 141793 Johnson v Hurley Medical Group

Sup Ct No. 142765 Mc Cahan v Brennan

_________________________________________________

On order of the Chief Justice, the above cases, previously scheduled to be orally

argued in the January, 2012 session, are adjourned and are to be placed on a later session

calendar.
#### CORDERO v. BROWNELL et al.

No. 209, Docket 22987.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued March 10, 1954.

Decided March 24, 1954.

Solomon E. Star, New York City (Mc-Manus & Ernst, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant.

George B. Searls, Atty., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C. (Dallas S. Townsend, Asst. Atty. Gen., James D. Hill, Atty., Dept., of Justice, Washington, D. C., and J. Edward Lumbard, U. S. Atty., New York City, on the brief), for defendants-appellees.

Before CLARK, MEDINA, and HARLAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

In a reasoned opinion, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 111 F.Supp. 556, Judge Kaufman granted a summary- judgment for defendants in this action by an administrator c. t. a. for the return of property vested in the Alien Property Custodian under the Trading with the Enemy Act, 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix, § 9(a), holding that, whatever the status of the administrator or his testator, recovery could not be had where the ultimate beneficial owners were enemies as defined in § 2(a). We affirm for the reasons stated in the opinion. As to the Attorney General’s motion to dismiss on the ground that he was not substituted for former Attorney General McGranery within six months of his succession to the office,- as required by Fed.RuIes Civ.Proc. rule 25(d), a difficult question is presented, since the Supreme Court has construed most strictly the former 28 U.S.C. § 780, requiring such substitution, and has even discussed it in terms of jurisdiction of the district court. Snyder v. Buck, 340 U.S. 15, 71 S.Ct. 93, 95 L. Ed. 15. This statute was repealed, effective September 1, 1948, because, according to the Reviser’s Note, it had been superseded by the rules — see Committee Note to amended F.R. 25(d)— thus leaving the period of limitation stated only in a procedural rule of court. The rather serious questions thus presented áre more or less academic here, since the substitution of the defendant Treasurer of the United States was made in proper time. Decision on the main issue is therefore in any event necessary.

Judgment affirmed.
### Tectonic setting of late Miocene, Pliocene, and Pleistocene rocks in part of the Coast Ranges north of San Francisco, California

By: K. F. Fox Jr.

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1239

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
§ 1697.6 Written decision. ( a ) The hearing official shall issue a written opinion no later than 60 days after the hearing.
( b ) The written opinion will include: a statement of the facts presented to demonstrate the nature and origin of the alleged debt; the hearing official's analysis, findings and conclusions; the amount and validity of the debt, and the repayment schedule, if applicable.
1 Attachment 

Hi Sona, 

 

Please find attached a list of “other cattle” facilities with herd information and associated emissions. Please let 

Ramon know if you have any questions. 

 

-Samir 

 

Estimated Emissions for Other Permitted Cattle Facilities Located.xlsx 

Samir Sheikh 

to: 

Sona Chilingaryan 

08/08/2011 02:04 PM 

Cc: 

"Ramon Norman", "Sheraz Gill", "Errol Villegas", "Jessi Fierro" 

Hide Details 

From: "Samir Sheikh" <Samir.Sheikh@valleyair.org>

To: Sona Chilingaryan/R9/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: "Ramon Norman" <Ramon.Norman@valleyair.org>, "Sheraz Gill" 

<Sheraz.Gill@valleyair.org>, "Errol Villegas" <errol.villegas@valleyair.org>, "Jessi Fierro" 

<Jessica.Fierro@valleyair.org>

History: This message has been replied to. 

Estimated Emissions for Other Permitted Cattle Facilities Located.xlsx

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\schiling\Local Settings\Temp\notesBAAA25\~web7543.htm 9/7/2011
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Earnings and Hours in the Hat Industries, 1939

              																	Perlman, Jacob, 1898-					 and 	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Earnings and Hours in the Hat Industries, 1939 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 671*,												Washington, D.C: 								U.S. G.P.O., 										1939,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4177,			accessed on August 25, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
#### In the Matter of the Intermediate Accounting of Marine Midland Bank-Rochester, as Cotrustee. Louis J. Lefkowitz, as Attorney-General of the State of New York, Appellant; Richard V. Dow et al., Respondents.

Decree unanimously affirmed, with costs, on the opinion at *986Surrogate’s Court, Telesca, S. (Appeal from decree of Monroe Surrogate’s Court-attorneys fees.) Present-Moule, J. P., Cardamone, Simons, Dillon and Hancock, Jr., JJ.
- All
            - Title
            - Author
            - Subject
            - Date
            - Full-Text

            -                              Explore                            ******                - Educational Resources
              - Archival Collections
              -                                      Themes                                    ******                  - Economic Data
                - Federal Reserve
                - View all 
              - Timelines 
            -                              Browse                            ******                - Titles
              - Authors
              - Subjects
              - Dates 
            -                              About                            ******                - About FRASER
              - FAQ
              - Contact Us
              -                                      FRASER API                                    ******                  - REST API
                - OAI-PMH 
            - Inside FRASER Blog

            - **

Home                 > Browse by Title > Wartime Earnings and Spending in Honolulu, 1943

              																	Epstein, Lenore A. (Lenore Alice)					 and 	United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 						*Wartime Earnings and Spending in Honolulu, 1943 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 788*,												Washington, D.C: 								G.P.O., 										1944,									https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/4263,			accessed on September 21, 2024.						    

        - **FRASER**
        - About
        - FAQ
        - Legal and Privacy
        - FRASER API

          -                              @FedFRASER 
          - ** Contact Us
          -  **  What's New  
          -  **  Inside FRASER
#### Maude K. Hayes, Appellant, v. Utica Mutual Insurance Company et al., Respondents.

Order insofar as it grants the motion to dismiss under subdivision 4 of rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice and judgment based *733thereon, unanimously reversed and motion denied, without costs, without prejudice to the right to renew in accordance with the memorandum; order insofar as it denies plaintiff’s motion for an examination of defendants before trial unanimously affirmed, without prejudice to renew in accordance with the memorandum, without costs of this appeal to any party. Memorandum: See our Memoranda in Cases 2, 3 and 4. Although this complaint is much more orderly than the complaint involved in Case No. 2 nevertheless the motions under rules 90 and 102 should have been granted. After new motions are made and granted under rules 90 and 102 the motion under subdivision 4 of rule 106 may be renewed if defendants or any of them are so advised. It was difficult if not impossible to determine, under the form of the complaint, whether the motion under subdivision 5 of rule 107 should have been granted. Our order is without prejudice to the right to renew such motion after amendment of the complaint, if so advised. The plaintiff may also renew her motion to examine defendants at the appropriate time and upon proper papers. (Appeal from judgment and order of Oneida Special Term dismissing the amended complaint. The order appealed from granted the motion to dismiss and denied the plaintiff’s cross motion for an examination of the defendants before trial.) Present — Williams, P. J., Goldman, McClusky and Henry, JJ.
#### PEOPLE, Appellant, v. SMITH et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

November 11, 1903.)

Proceeding by the people of the state of New York against Merle Smith and Leslie Collins.

No opinion. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Exhibit 32.1



Certificate Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63

of Title 18 of the United States Code



I, James R. Bazet, the chief executive officer of Cobra Electronics Corporation, certify that (i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Cobra Electronics
Corporation for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2003 (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Cobra Electronics Corporation and its subsidiaries.

/S/    JAMES R.
BAZETJames R. BazetAugust 14, 2003
# C_2008313EN.01002301.xml

| 6.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/23

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 15 October 2008 — Gogos v Commission

(Case T-66/04) (1)

1

(Staff case - Officials - Internal competition for change of category - Appointment - Classification in grade - Article 31(2) of the Staff Regulations)

(2008/C 313/40)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Christos Gogos (Waterloo, Belgium) (represented by: C. Tagaras initially, then N. Korogiannakis, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Currall, Agent, and P. Anestis, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission's decision classifying the applicant in Grade A7, step 3, and the decision of 24 November 2003, rejecting the administrative complaint.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Commission to pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Commission to pay all the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 94, 17.4.2004.

1

---
Stack Testing during 2005, 2008, 2010 and 2011

This was compiled from confidential testing submitted to EPA Region 7 by Certainteed. This spreadsheet does not contain CBI.

The permitted production rate of the K2 furnace is 158952.9tons per year The following chromium emissions were determined based on measured emissions of chromium on a pounds per ton glass melted, at the permitted production rate (158952.9 tons per year)

Year Month Test

Method Analyte Emission Rate (lb/ton) Chromium Emissions at permitted

production rate, pounds per year 2011Sept 61 Cr (VI) 7.49E-05 12 2010 Nov 61 Cr (VI) 3.20E-03 509 2010 Nov 29Cr 3.50E-03 556 2008 Nov 29Cr 1.17E-03 186 2005 Nov 29Cr 5.31E-05 8

Certainteed Chromium Emission Testing on the K2 Furnace