alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### § 1.406 How will FDA handle classified information in an informal hearing?

Where the credible evidence or information supporting the detention order is classified under the applicable Executive order as requiring protection from unauthorized disclosure in the interest of national security (“classified information”), FDA will not provide you with this information. The presiding officer will give you notice of the general nature of the information and an opportunity to offer opposing evidence or information, if he or she may do so consistently with safeguarding the information and its source. If classified information was used to support the detention, then any confirmation of such detention will state whether it is based in whole or in part on that classified information.
Affirmed and Opinion and Dissenting Opinion fil ed September 19 , 2024

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 23

- 00910

- CV

DEXTER BUCHANAN FERNIL AND DELENA FERNIL , Appellant s

V.

BLUEBIRD MEDICAL ENTERPRISES, LLC D/B/A ALLEGIANCE

MOBILE HEALTH AND NICOLE MARINA MIRZA , Appellee s

On Appeal from the 239th District Court

Brazoria County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 105367

- CV

DISSENTING OPINION

The Texas Health Care Liability Act was originally enacted by the

Legislature to protect physicians from questionable medical malpractice lawsuits.

Today’s majority opinion expands this protection to ambulance drivers who

negligently violate rules of the road. A medical opinion is not required to either

establish the rules of the road or common negligence. To the extent that the

majority extends the HCLA to the facts of this case, I respectfully dissent.2 /s/ Jerry Zimmerer

Justice

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Zimmerer and Wilson.

(Zimmerer, J., dissenting).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         201,156
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  748,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (35,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    823,431
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,786,969
<PP&E>                                       1,385,784
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,004,282)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,466,554
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,557,887
<BONDS>                                        326,346
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       280,982
<OTHER-SE>                                     301,339
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,466,554
<SALES>                                      1,118,882
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,118,882
<CGS>                                          560,256
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  560,256
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               579,450
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,804
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (31,628)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 17,427
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (49,055)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

Scott W. Johnson and Florence H.

Cummings

,

Appellant s

,

v.

Cale Andrew Clifton; Christopher Matther

Clifon; Pamela Parker Clifton; Cog

Operating, LLC; Desert Partners IV, LP;

Kelli Clifton Gossmann; Lambert Land

Co., LLC; KMF Land, LLC; McCamey

Farm & Ranch, LP; J. LLoyd Pa rker III

Estate; Springwood Mineral 4, LP; robin

Lee Young; Young Oil and Gas, LP and

Lake Ranch, LP.

,

Appellee s

. **§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§** No. 08

- 22

- 00 1 32

- CV

Appeal from the

143 rd District Court

of Reeves County, Texas

(TC# 20

- 07

- 23609

- CVR )

O R D E R

On Ju ly 21 , 2022, this Court issued an order for mediation referral. The order required

the parties to make any objection to referral within ten days of the order. On August 1, 2022

,

Appellees filed an objection. The Court finds Appell ees ’ objection persuasive.

Therefore, the Court ORDERS this appeal to continue, the appellate timetable suspension

is lifted, and the Clerk ’ s Record shall now be filed in this Court on or before September 30,

2022

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 2 nd day of August , 20 2 2

.

P ER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez , C.J., Palafox and Alley , JJ.
2030.201-5 Waiver.

Requests to waive Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) requirements must be submitted to the

Chairman, CAS Board by the Competition Advocate. The requests for waiver must be forwarded

through the Head of the Contracting Activity with supporting documentation and rationale in

accordance with FAR 30.201-5.

Parent topic: Subpart 2030.2 - CAS Program Requirements
# EUR-Lex - 31994D0722 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31994D0722

**94/722/EC: Commission Decision of 25 October 1994 approving the programme concerning bonamiosis and marteiliosis submitted by France (Only the French text is authentic) **

*
Official Journal L 288 , 09/11/1994 P. 0047 - 0047 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 25 October 1994 approving the programme concerning bonamiosis and marteiliosis submitted by France (Only the French text is authentic) (94/722/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 91/67/EEC of 28 January 1991 concerning the animal health conditions governing the placing on the market of aquaculture animals and products (1), as amended by Directive 93/54/EEC (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

Whereas Member States may submit to the Commission a programme to obtain the status of an approved zone, free of certain diseases affecting molluscs;

Whereas on 4 may 1993 France submitted a programme concerning bonamiosis and marteiliosis; whereas, by letter dated 14 October, France submitted further information on the approval of French coastal zones in respect of these diseases;

Whereas the programme specifies the geographical zones concerned, the measures to be taken by the official services, the procedures to be followed by the approved laboratories, the prevalence of the diseases in question and the measures to combat these diseases where detected;

Whereas the programme meets the requirements laid down in Article 10 of Directive 91/67/EEC;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The programme concerning bonamiosis and marteiliosis submitted by France is hereby approved.

Article 2

France shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the programme referred to in Article 1.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to France.

Done at Brussels, 25 October 1994.

For the Commission

René STEICHEN

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ No L 46, 19. 2. 1991, p. 1.

(2) OJ No L 175, 19. 7. 1993, p. 34.
228 So.2d 484

#### James C. McDONALD v. Honorable Harry ANDERS, Judge, Fifth Judicial District of Louisiana, Parish of Richland, et al.

No. 50246.

Dec. 11, 1969.

In re: James C. McDonald applying for writs of mandamus and habeas corpus.

The application is denied. The showing made does not warrarn the exercise of either our original or supervisory jurisdiction.

I concur in the refusal of writs on the ground, however, that the application does not .conform with the rules of this Court.
§ 111.205 What is the requirement to establish a master manufacturing record? ( a ) You must prepare and follow a written master manufacturing record for each unique formulation of dietary supplement that you manufacture, and for each batch size, to ensure uniformity in the finished batch from batch to batch.
( b ) The master manufacturing record must: ( 1 ) Identify specifications for the points, steps, or stages in the manufacturing process where control is necessary to ensure the quality of the dietary supplement and that the dietary supplement is packaged and labeled as specified in the master manufacturing record; and
( 2 ) Establish controls and procedures to ensure that each batch of dietary supplement that you manufacture meets the specifications identified in accordance with paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
( c ) You must make and keep master manufacturing records in accordance with subpart P of this part.
§ 904.7 Base charge. ( a ) The Base Charge shall be developed by the Administrator and promulgated in accordance with appropriate DOE regulations. The Base Charge shall be composed of a capacity component and an energy component.
( b ) The capacity component of the Base Charge shall be a dollar per kilowattmonth amount determined by ( 1 ) multiplying the estimated average annual revenue requirement developed pursuant to paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of § 904.5 of these General Regulations by 50 percent, and
( 2 ) dividing the results of that multiplication by the estimated average annual kW rating of the Project, and
( 3 ) dividing the quotient by 12. The total estimated kW rating will be based on the powerplant output capability with all units in service at 498 feet of net effective head or 1,951,000 kW, whichever is less. The capacity component of the Base Charge shall be applied each billing period to each kW of rated output to which each Contractor is entitled by Contract. Adjustments to the application of the capacity component shall be made during outages which cause significant reductions in capacity as provided by the Contract.
( c ) The energy component of the Base Charge shall be a mills per kWh amount determined by ( 1 ) multiplying the estimated average annual revenue requirements developed pursuant to paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of § 904.5 of these General Regulations by 50 percent and
( 2 ) dividing the results of that multiplication by the average annual kWh estimated to be available from the Project. The energy component of the Base Charge shall be applied to each kWh made available to each Contractor, as provided for by Contract, except for the energy purchased by Western, at the request of a Contractor, to meet that Contractor's deficiency in Firm Energy pursuant to section 105(a)(2) of the Hoover Power Plant Act (43 U.S.C. 619(a)(2)) and section F of the Conformed Criteria, and that Contractor's Uprating Program credit carry forward, as provided by Contract.
( d ) Application of the Base Charge to capacity and energy overruns will be provided for by Contract. The capacity component and the energy component of the Base Charge shall be applied each billing period for each Contractor.
( e ) The Base Charge shall be reviewed annually. The Base Charge shall be adjusted either upward or downward, when necessary and administratively feasible, to assure sufficient revenues to effect payment of all costs and financial obligations associated with the Project pursuant to paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of § 904.5 of these General Regulations. The Administrator shall provide all Contractors an opportunity to comment on any proposed adjustment to the Base Charge pursuant to the DOE's power rate adjustment procedures then in effect.
# SEA4*PDR T

r AI R LI N E S
FO R IMMEDIAT E RELEASE : Novembe r8
. 201 1 Contact Informatio n Clair e James : Marketin g Coordinator/SeaPortAirtlnes , Inc
. 971-340-1713 , Claire@SeaPortAir.co m Ro b McKinney : President/SeaPor t Airlines , Inc
. 971-340-1711 , Rob(5)SeaPortAir.co m 

# SeaPor t Airline s Statemen t o n EA S Proposal s t o Serv e Muscl e Shoals , Greenville , Laurel-Hattiesburg , an d Tupel o

* " •• (Novembers , 2011)-SeaPor t Airline s todayrelease d th e followin g statemen t regardin g thei rproposal s t o provid e ai rservic e t o fou rrura l communitie s i n th e Souther n regio n ofth e Unite d States : "O n Octobe r12 , 2011
. SeaPor t Airline s submitte d proposal s t o provid e schedule d ai rservic e unde rth e Essentia l Ai rServic e progra m t o Muscl e Shoals , Laurel-Hattiesburg , Tupelo , an d Greenville
. Followin g communicatio n vi a telephone , i n writing , an d i n person , i t i s eviden t tha t al l communitie s inten d t o reject al l proposals , th e incumben t wil l b e hel d i n unde rthei rcurren t contract , an d ne wproposal s wil l b e requested
. Fo rthi s reason , SeaPor t Airline s ha s cancele d it s planne d visit s t o eac h o fth e communitie s tha t were schedule d fo rthi s week
. SeaPor t Airline s understand s th e communities ' concer n regardin g a chang e fro m a larg e t o a smalle raircraft , thoug h we believ e tha t suc h a chang e t o smalle raircraft wit h greate rfrequencyi s th e futur e o frura l ai rsen/ice
. Ou rsucces s i n rebuildin g passenge rtraffi ci n Arkansa s communities , a s wel l a s providin g reliabl e ai rservic e i n Salina , K S an d Pendleton , validat e thi s belief
. I n eac h o fthes e communities , SeaPor t ha s successfull yreplace d large raircraft o rreinstate d servic e afte r suspensio n fro m anothe rcarrie r Whil e we hav e cancele d ou rvisit s planne d fo rthi s week , w e inten d t o maintai n a dialogu e wit h eac h communityt o develo p a proposal , an d t o b e abl e t o submi t a proposa l i n th e futur e tha t provide s a n enhance d leve l o fconnectivity. " Abou t SeaPort Airline s Portland , Oregon-base d SeaPor t Airlines , Inc
. operate s dail yschedule d flight s i n Arkansas , Kansas , Tennessee , Missouri , Texas ; Itlaho , Oregon , Washington , an d Alaska
. Reservation s ca n b e mad e bycallin g 888-573-2767 , at vww.SeaPortAirlines.com
. o rthroug h al l majo rCD S systems
. Follo wSeaPor t o n Facebook , Twitter , an d vi a thei rblo g th e SeaPor t RePort
. SeaPor

t Airline s pride s itsel fo n it s outstandin g ai rservice
. Customers ca n expect t o encounte ra uniqu e an d personalize d trave l experienc e fro m th e momen t the yarriv e fo rcheck-i n at th e termina l unti l the yreac h thei r destination
. # # #
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 14, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-61191

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LEON ROBINSON, also known as Willie Earl Robinson,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 4:05-CR-90

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

Before REAVLEY, HIGGINBOTHAM and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Following a jury trial, Leon Robinson was convicted of

possessing a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.S. § 922(g)(1) and

was sentenced as an armed career criminal. Robinson has appealed

his conviction and his 262-month sentence. Robinson argues that

the district court erred by admitting into evidence a detachable

magazine, bearing Robinson’s fingerprint, which was found with

the firearm identified in the indictment. He contends that the

magazine should have been excluded from evidence because its
No. 05-61191

-2-

potential to prejudice the jury exceeded its probative value. 

Robinson further argues that his sentence violates the Sixth

Amendment because it is based in part on facts not found by the

jury or stipulated to by Robinson. He suggests that his sentence

is unreasonable under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220

(2005), because the trial court considered his use of the firearm

in the armed robbery as relevant conduct under the United States

Sentencing Guidelines. 

We conclude that the admission of the magazine into evidence

was within the broad discretion of the district court. United

States v. Wilson, 355 F.3d 358, 361 (5th Cir. 2003). The court

instructed the jury that the magazine was not an illegal weapon,

and Robinson’s fingerprint on the magazine is probative of the

fact that Robinson possessed the firearm. Id.

The district court’s consideration of Robinson’s relevant

conduct in determining the appropriate guidelines sentencing

range did not violate the Sixth Amendment. United States v.

Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 553 (5th Cir. 2006); United States v.

Johnson, 445 F.3d 793, 798 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ S. Ct.

___, 2006 WL 1584471 (2006) (No. 05-10908). Robinson’s sentence,

which is at the bottom of the properly calculated advisory

sentencing guidelines range, is not unreasonable and,

accordingly, it is affirmed. Alonzo, 435 F.3d at 554-55;

Johnson, 445 F.3d at 797-98. 

AFFIRMED.
Editorial Note on Part 25
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 25 appear at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014.

§ 25.100 Purposes of this part. This part provides guidance to Federal awarding agencies to establish: ( a ) The unique entity identifier as a universal identifier for Federal financial assistance applicants, as well as recipients and their direct subrecipients, and;
( b ) The System for Award Management (SAM) as the repository for standard information about applicants and recipients.
[75 FR 55673, Sept. 14, 2010, as amended at 79 FR 75879, Dec. 19, 2014; 80 FR 54407, Sept. 10, 2015; 85 FR 49522, Aug. 13, 2020]
Exhibit
32.1







CERTIFICATION


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)





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), each of the
undersigned officers of National Datacomputer, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
“Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





The
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the “Form
10-Q”) of the Company 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-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.









Dated:
      November 24, 2008
              /s/ William
      B. BerensWilliam
      B. BerensPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer


Dated:
      November 24, 2008
              /s/ Bruna
      BucacciBruna
      BucacciChief
      Accounting 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 furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 28 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States 

Postal Service should take all appropriate measures to ensure the continuation of door delivery for all business and residential customers. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 5, 2017 

Mrs. DAVIS of California (for herself, Mr. JOYCE of Ohio, and Mr. KING of 

New York) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

the United States Postal Service should take all appropriate measures to ensure the continuation of door delivery for all business and residential customers. 

Whereas the United States Postal Service has announced 

that it may need to eliminate or reduce levels of door-todoor delivery service by the conversion of millions of 

home and businesses to centralized delivery or curbside 

and require those who wish to retain their door service 

to pay a delivery tax; 

Whereas reduced levels of service will have an immediate impact on current year revenue and a long-term impact on 

the viability of a business inevitably causing a larger drop 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 28 IH 

in revenue from service cuts than from the estimated savings of elimination or reducing door delivery; 

Whereas door delivery is a vital service that the American 

people have relied on since the 1860s in both rural and 

urban areas and ensures the security of mail and packages; 

Whereas voluntary conversion of businesses in 2013 equated 

to a mere 0.8 percent of voluntary conversions confirming 

that businesses depend on in-person contact with letter 

carriers to ensure transactional security and initiate new 

business and revenue for the Postal Service; 

Whereas millions of Americans will be forced to retrieve their 

daily mail and packages from a centralized location removing the daily convenience for Americans in receiving 

checks, medications and other essential items; and 

Whereas eliminating or reducing door delivery services will 

serve as a hindrance for the elderly and disabled who will 

be forced to retrieve their mail and packages and be required to submit to a cumbersome application process in 

order to opt out of the requirement: Now, therefore, be 

it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the United States Postal Service should 

3 take all appropriate measures to ensure the continuation 

4 of door delivery for all businesses and residential cus5 tomers. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS