alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### 1252.223-71 Accident and Fire Reporting.

As prescribed in 1223.7000(a), insert the following clause:

# Accident and Fire Reporting (NOV 2022)

(a) The Contractor shall report to the Contracting Officer any accident or fire occurring at the site of the work which causes—

(1) A fatality or as much as one lost workday on the part of any employee of the Contractor or subcontractor at any tier;

(2) Damage of $1,000 or more to Government-owned or leased property, either real or personal;

(3) Damage of $1,000 or more to Contractor or subcontractor owned or leased motor vehicles or mobile equipment; or

(4) Damage for which a contract time extension may be requested.

(b) Accident and fire reports required by paragraph (a) of this section shall be accomplished by the following means:

(1) Accidents or fires resulting in a death, hospitalization of five or more persons, or destruction of Government-owned or leased property (either real or personal), the total value of which is estimated at $100,000 or more, shall be reported immediately by telephone to the Contracting Officer or his/her authorized representative and shall be confirmed in writing within 24 hours to the Contracting Officer. Such report shall state all known facts as to extent of injury and damage and as to cause of the accident or fire.

(2) Other accident and fire reports required by paragraph (a) of this section may be reported by the Contractor using a state, private insurance carrier, or Contractor accident report form which provides for the statement of—

(i) The extent of injury; and

(ii) The damage and cause of the accident or fire.

Such report shall be mailed or otherwise delivered to the Contracting Officer within 48 hours of the occurrence of the accident or fire.

(c) The Contractor shall assure compliance by subcontractors at all tiers with the requirements of this clause.

(End of clause)
§ 75.5 DoD criteria for identifying family members with special needs. ( a ) *Special medical needs.* Individuals who meet one or more of the criteria in this section will be identified as a family member with special medical needs: ( 1 ) Potentially life-threatening conditions or chronic (duration of 6 months or longer) medical or physical conditions requiring follow-up care from a primary care manager (to include pediatricians) more than once a year or specialty care.
( 2 ) Current and chronic (duration of 6 months or longer) mental health conditions (such as bi-polar, conduct, major affective, thought, or personality disorders); inpatient or intensive (greater than one visit monthly for more than 6 months) outpatient mental health service within the last 5 years; or intensive mental health services required at the present time. This includes medical care from any provider, including a primary care manager.
( 3 ) A diagnosis of asthma or other respiratory-related diagnosis with chronic recurring symptoms that involves one or more of the following: ( i ) Scheduled use of inhaled or oral anti-inflammatory agents or bronchodilators.
( ii ) History of emergency room use or clinic visits for acute asthma exacerbations or other respiratory-related diagnosis within the last year.
( iii ) History of one or more hospitalizations for asthma, or other respiratory-related diagnosis within the past 5 years.
( 4 ) A diagnosis of attention deficit disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder that involves one or more of the following: ( i ) Includes a co-morbid psychological diagnosis.
( ii ) Requires multiple medications, psycho-pharmaceuticals (other than stimulants) or does not respond to normal doses of medication.
( iii ) Requires management and treatment by a mental health provider (*e.g.,* psychiatrist, psychologist, social worker or psychiatric nurse practitioner).
( iv ) Requires the involvement of a specialty consultant, other than a primary care manager, more than twice a year on a chronic basis.
( v ) Requires modifications of the educational curriculum or the use of behavioral management staff.
( 5 ) A chronic condition that requires: ( i ) Adaptive equipment (such as an apnea home monitor, home nebulizer, wheelchair, custom-fit splints/braces/orthotics (not over-the-counter), hearing aids, home oxygen therapy, home ventilator, etc.).
( ii ) Assistive technology devices (such as communication devices) or services.
( iii ) Environmental or architectural considerations (such as medically required limited numbers of steps, wheelchair accessibility, or housing modifications and air conditioning).
( b ) *Special educational needs.* Family members of active duty Service members (regardless of location) and civilian employees appointed to an overseas location eligible for enrollment in a DoDEA school on a space-required basis will be identified as having special educational needs if they have, or are found eligible for, either an IFSP or an IEP under 32 CFR part 57.
#### SILBER, Respondent v. ERICSON, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.

November 6, 1903.)

Action by Mendle Silber against Hjalmer Ericson. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant, appeals. Reversed.

Frayer, White & Seaman, for appellant.

Jacoves & Mullen, for respondent.

BLANCHARD, J.

As the action was not brought by the real party in interest, and the finding of the trial court is clearly against not only the weight of evidence, but the evidence, the judgment must be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.
### §7283. Commodity Credit Corporation interest rate

#### (a) In general

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the monthly Commodity Credit Corporation interest rate applicable to loans provided for agricultural commodities by the Corporation shall be 100 basis points greater than the rate determined under the applicable interest rate formula in effect on October 1, 1995.

#### (b) Sugar

For purposes of this section, raw cane sugar, refined beet sugar, and in-process sugar eligible for a loan under section 7272 of this title shall not be considered an agricultural commodity.

(Pub. L. 104–127, title I, §163, Apr. 4, 1996, 110 Stat. 935; Pub. L. 107–171, title I, §1401(c), May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 187.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2002—Pub. L. 107–171 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), inserted heading, and added subsec. (b).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

United States of America )

Plaintiffs ) Case No: 12 CR 87

)

v. )

) Judge:

Ronald Watts )

Defendant )

)

ORDER

Change of plea hearing held. Defendant withdraws plea of not guilty and enters blind plea of

guilty to count 1 of the information. Defendant informed of rights. Judgment of guilty entered. 

Cause referred to the Probation Office for a presentence investigation. Sentencing set to

10/9/2013 at 1:30 p.m. Sentencing memorandum and/or objections to the presentence

investigation to be filed by 9/25/2013. Any responses to be filed by 10/2/2013. Jury trial set to

7/22/2013 is hereby stricken. Bond to stand.

(T:)00:21

Date: July 19, 2013 /s/ Sharon Johnson Coleman

United States District Court Judge
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19

- 1753 V

UNPUBLISHED

JASON MANUS

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: April 29, 2021

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;
Table Injury; Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury

Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA , for petitioner.

Jennifer Leigh Reynaud , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On November 13, 2019

, Jason Manus filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that h e suffered a right shoulder injury relate d t o vaccine administration (SIRVA) resulting from a human papillomavirus vaccination administered

on Ja nuary 24, 2019 . Petit ion at Preamble . The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On April 28, 2021

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that

P etitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Petitioner had n o history of pain , inflammation, or dysfunction of his shoulder;

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required
to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

- Government Act

of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government
Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information,

the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that
the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease
of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012 ).2 medical records document that the shoulder pain occurred within 48 hours of vaccination; the pain was limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or abnormality has been identified to explain Petitioner ’ s shoulder pain. Id. at 4

. Respondent further agrees that Petitioner suffered the residual effects of the condition for

more than six months

. Id.

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Willis and Annunziata and Senior Judge Cole 

Argued at Richmond, Virginia 

LINDA F. WHITE, a/k/a 

 LINDA F. DISE 

v. Record No. 0026-95-2 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

 JUDGE JERE M. H. WILLIS, JR. 

WILLIAM H. WHITE, JR. 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY 

Timothy J. Hauler, Judge 

 (Michael Morchower; Sharon Gregory Jacobs; 

Morchower, Luxton and Whaley, on briefs), for 

appellant. 

 (Charles E. Ayers, Jr.; Cynthia A. Muncie; 

Robert H. Smallenberg; Ayers & Stolte, P.C., 

on brief), for appellee. 

 Linda F. White appeals from a final order denying her 

request for attorney's fees and ordering her to pay $14,000 in 

attorney's fees to William H. White, Jr. Ms. White contends that 

the trial court abused its discretion in making this award. We 

disagree and affirm the judgment of the trial court. 

 Pursuant to Code §§ 20-79(b) and 20-99(5), a trial court may 

award attorney's fees as equity and justice require. "An award 

of attorney's fees is a matter submitted to the trial court's 

sound discretion and is reviewable on appeal only for an abuse of 

discretion." Graves v. Graves, 4 Va. App. 326, 333, 357 S.E.2d 

554, 558 (1987). 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

 The trial court found that although the divorce had been 

granted on no fault grounds, Ms. White was "principally 

responsible for the breakup of the marital relationship." The 

court further found that "because of the conduct of the defendant 

[Ms. White], the plaintiff [Mr. White] . . . was put to an 

untotaled expense in the litigation of the matter. The record 

supports these findings and discloses that Mr. White incurred 

attorney's fees and costs substantially exceeding $14,000 in his 

defense of the litigation. We find no abuse of discretion in the 

award. 

 The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. 

 Affirmed.
- 3 - 

M E M O R A N D U M

TO: Cindi McCoy, Clerk 

FROM: Judge Willis 

DATE: January 29, 1996 

RE: Linda F. White v. William H. White, Jr. 

 Record No. 0026-95-2 

 01/96 Richmond Panel 

Dear Cindi: 

 Attached is a memorandum opinion in the above 

captioned case that has been approved by the panel. 

The record and Exhibit Box #1293 are being returned 

to your office by UPS. 

 Very truly yours, 

 JMHW,Jr. 
- 4 - 

JMHW,Jr./phb 

Enclosure 

cc: Full Court 

(PROFS #J0026952.MEM)
12.404 Warranties. ( a ) *Implied warranties.* The Government's post award rights contained in 52.212-4 are the implied warranty of merchantability, the implied warranty of fitness for particular purpose and the remedies contained in the acceptance paragraph. ( 1 ) The implied warranty of merchantability provides that an item is reasonably fit for the ordinary purposes for which such items are used. The items must be of at least average, fair or medium-grade quality and must be comparable in quality to those that will pass without objection in the trade or market for items of the same description.
( 2 ) The implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose provides that an item is fit for use for the particular purpose for which the Government will use the items. The Government can rely upon an implied warranty of fitness for particular purpose when— ( i ) The seller knows the particular purpose for which the Government intends to use the item; and
( ii ) The Government relied upon the contractor's skill and judgment that the item would be appropriate for that particular purpose.
( 3 ) Contracting officers should consult with legal counsel prior to asserting any claim for a breach of an implied warranty.
( b ) *Express warranties.* 41 U.S.C. 3307(e)(5)(B) requires contracting officers to take advantage of commercial warranties. To the maximum extent practicable, solicitations for commercial productsshall require offerors to offer the Government at least the same warranty terms, including offers of extended warranties, offered to the general public in customary commercial practice. Solicitations may specify minimum warranty terms, such as minimum duration, appropriate for the Government's intended use of the item. ( 1 ) Any express warranty the Government intends to rely upon must meet the needs of the Government. The contracting officer should analyze any commercial warranty to determine if— ( i ) The warranty is adequate to protect the needs of the Government, e.g., items covered by the warranty and length of warranty;
( ii ) The terms allow the Government effective postaward administration of the warranty to include the identification of warranted items, procedures for the return of warranted items to the contractor for repair or replacement, and collection of product performance information; and
( iii ) The warranty is cost-effective.
( 2 ) In some markets, it may be customary commercial practice for contractors to exclude or limit the implied warranties contained in 52.212-4 in the provisions of an express warranty. In such cases, the contracting officer shall ensure that the express warranty provides for the repair or replacement of defective items discovered within a reasonable period of time after acceptance.
( 3 ) Express warranties shall be included in the contract by addendum (see 12.302).
[60 FR 48241, Sept. 18, 1995, as amended at 79 FR 24200, Apr. 29, 2014; 86 FR 61023, Nov. 4, 2021]
[LETTERHEAD OF WIEN & MALKIN LLP]

 

 

 

 

 

 

	April 30, 2004

 

 

TO PARTICIPANTS IN EMPIRE STATE BUILDING ASSOCIATES L.L.C. 

Federal Identification Number 13-6084254		

We enclose the annual report of Empire State Building Associates L.L.C. ("Associates") for the year ended December 31, 2003 and the comparative statement of operations under the sublease for the years 2003 and 2002.  Associates is a limited liability company which is treated as a partnership for income tax purposes. 

Property performance at the Empire State Building continues to be adversely impacted by the after effects of 9/11 and by the steep increase in expenses for security and insurance.  The decrease in rental income and increase in expense were partially offset by an increase in Observatory and antenna income.  Significant expenditures will be incurred in 2004 to improve the critical Observatory operations.  The operating lessee projects that its profit in 2004 will be less than in 2003.  New retail leases signed in 2004 and out for signature should help 2005 results.

The amount of $35,968 for professional fees and miscellaneous expense incurred in 2003 by Associates included $10,529 in connection with the acquisition of the fee and $18,281 paid to Wien & Malkin LLP for consent solicitation matters.

The operating lease provides for the payment of additional rent equal to 50% of the operating lessee's profit in excess of $1,000,000.  The profit for 2003 was $14,604,590, so that the operating lessee paid additional rent of $6,802,295.  The profit for 2002 was $29,952,016, so that the operating lessee paid additional rent of $14,476,008. 

After reserves described below, $4,722,775 was available for distribution for 2003.  In accordance with Associates' operating agreement, 6% of the distribution, $283,366, has been paid to Wien & Malkin.  $4,439,409 was distributed to the Participants on March 2, 2004 and represented about 13.5% on the original cash investment of $33,000,000.  Together with regular monthly distributions during the year 2003, total distributions to Participants for 2003 were at the rate of about 25.3%.  Details are as follows:

 

 

 

Additional rent for the year 2003		$6,802,295

Dividend and interest income		      70,480
		6,872,775

Less:

	Set-aside for annual debt service 

	on the mortgage, net of ground rent savings	 $2,000,000

Addition to reserves 	    150,000	2,150,000		

	Balance		$4,722,775
Distribution to Participants on March 2, 2004		$4,439,409

Additional fee paid to Wien & Malkin
<PAGE>


Exhibit 32

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Emerson Radio Corp. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Geoffrey P. Jurick, Chief Executive Officer, and Guy A.
Paglinco, Chief Financial Officer, of the Company each hereby certifies pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates
presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the
periods presented.


Dated: August 12, 2005

                                   By: /s/ Geoffrey P. Jurick
                                       ---------------------------------------
                                   Geoffrey P. Jurick
                                   Chief Executive Officer


                                   By: /s/ Guy A. Paglinco
                                       ---------------------------------------
                                   Vice President and
                                   Chief Financial Officer


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter
63 of Title 18, United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Form
10-Q or as a separate disclosure document.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Emerson Radio Corp. and will be
retained by Emerson Radio Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.


                                       26
Case: 1:12-cv-00595 Document #: 15 Filed: 02/23/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:84
Case: 1:12-cv-00595 Document #: 15 Filed: 02/23/12 Page 2 of 7 PageID #:85
Case: 1:12-cv-00595 Document #: 15 Filed: 02/23/12 Page 3 of 7 PageID #:86
Case: 1:12-cv-00595 Document #: 15 Filed: 02/23/12 Page 4 of 7 PageID #:87
Case: 1:12-cv-00595 Document #: 15 Filed: 02/23/12 Page 5 of 7 PageID #:88
Case: 1:12-cv-00595 Document #: 15 Filed: 02/23/12 Page 6 of 7 PageID #:89
Case: 1:12-cv-00595 Document #: 15 Filed: 02/23/12 Page 7 of 7 PageID #:90
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**







**Certification
      of Principal Financial Officer**


**Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**


**As
      Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002**




Pursuant
      to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned
      officer of Mandalay Media, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does
      hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





The
      Annual Report on Form 10-KT for the period ending March 31, 2008 of the Company
      (the “Form 10-KT”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained
      in
      the Form 10-KT fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
      condition and results of operations of the Company.




Dated: July
      15, 2008




/s/
                Jay A. WolfJay
                A. WolfChief
                Financial Officer and Secretary(Principal
                Financial Officer)




A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and shall be furnished to the
      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 74.2 Policy. In the interest of obtaining maximum uniformity, the following criteria are established for the appointment of doctors of osteopathy as medical officers: ( a ) To be eligible for appointment as Medical Corps officers in the Army and Navy or designated as medical officers in the Air Force, a doctor of osteopathy must: ( 1 ) Be a citizen of the United States;
( 2 ) Be a graduate of a college of osteopathy whose graduates are eligible for licensure to practice medicine or surgery in a majority of the States, and be licensed to practice medicine, surgery, or osteopathy in one of the States or Territories of the United States or in the District of Columbia;
( 3 ) Possess such qualifications as the Secretary concerned may prescribe for his service, after considering the recommendations for such appointment by the Surgeon General of the Army or the Air Force or the Chief of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery of the Navy;
( 4 ) Have completed a minimum of three years college work prior to entrance into a college of osteopathy;
( 5 ) Have completed a four-year course with a degree of Doctor of Osteopathy from a school of osteopathy approved by the American Osteopathic Association; and
( 6 ) Have had subsequent to graduation from an approved school of osteopathy 12 months or more of intern or residency training approved by the American Osteopathic Association.
( b ) [Reserved]