alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 159 (Wednesday, August 19, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 41914]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19889]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; 
Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive 
and Kidney Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; P01 Application.
    Date: October 28, 2009.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, 
Bethesda, MD 20817.
    Contact Person: D. G. Patel, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Review Branch, DEA, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Room 756, 
6707 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-5452, (301) 594-7682, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7e0e1f0a1b121a193e10171a1a155010171650191108"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="bacadbcedfd6deddfad4d3deded194d4d3d294ddd5cc">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.847, 
Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolic Research; 93.848, Digestive 
Diseases and Nutrition Research; 93.849, Kidney Diseases, Urology 
and Hematology Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: August 11, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-19889 Filed 8-18-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 154 (Wednesday, August 12, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40631-40632]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19363]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 6667]


Industry Advisory Panel: Notice of Open Meeting

    The Industry Advisory Panel of Overseas Buildings Operations will 
meet on Thursday, September 3, 2009 from 9:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. 
Eastern Standard Time. The meeting will be held in room 1107 of the 
U.S. Department of State, located at 2201 C Street, NW. (entrance on 
23rd Street), Washington, DC. For logistical and security reasons, it 
is imperative that everyone enter and exit using only the 23rd Street 
entrance. The majority of the meeting will be devoted to an exchange of 
ideas between the Department's Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations' 
senior management and the panel members, on design, operations, and 
building maintenance. There will be a reasonable time provided for 
members of the public to provide comment.
    Entry to the building is controlled; to obtain pre-clearance for 
entry, members of the public planning to attend should

[[Page 40632]]

provide, by August 21, 2009, their name, professional affiliation, date 
of birth, citizenship, and a valid government-issued ID number (i.e., 
U.S. government ID, U.S. military ID, passport, or drivers license with 
state) by e-mailing: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c0a9a1b0b280b3b4a1b4a5eea7afb6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="563f37262416252237223378313920">[email protected]</span></a>. Requests for reasonable 
accommodation should be sent to the same e-mail address by August 27th. 
Requests made after that time will be considered, but might not be able 
to be fulfilled. Because of space restrictions, we request that 
companies interested in attending send only one representative.
    If you have any questions, please contact Jonathan Blyth at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7537190c011d3f3f3526011401105b321a03"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a1e3cdd8d5c9ebebe1f2d5c0d5c48fe6ced7">[email protected]</span></a> or on (703) 875-4131.

    Dated: July 29, 2009.
Adam Namm,
Director, Acting, Bureau of Overseas Building Operations, Department of 
State.
[FR Doc. E9-19363 Filed 8-11-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-24-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the balance
sheet and statement of income and is qualified in its entirety by reference to 
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000857264
<NAME>                        KRUPP GOVERNMENT INCOME TRUST 
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Jun-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   Jun-30-1998
<CASH>                                         37,138,095
<SECURITIES>                                   177,608,708<F1>
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,176,870
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               6,219,149<F2>
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 222,142,822
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          5,595,270<F3>
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       215,226,235
<OTHER-SE>                                     1,321,317<F4>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   222,142,822
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               15,175,958<F5>
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               2,661,687<F6>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                12,514,271
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            12,514,271
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   12,514,271
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>
<F1> Includes Participating Insured Mortgage Investments (PIMIs)(insured 
mortgages of $91,452,008 and Additional Loans of $13,358,208), Participating 
Insured Mortgages(PIMs)of $47,928,772 and Mortgage-backed Securities (MBS) of
$24,869,720.
<F2> Includes prepaid acquisition fees and expenses of $12,266,450 net of 
accumulated amortization of $7,842,467 and prepaid participation servicing fees
of $4,088,713 net of accumulated amortization of $2,293,547.
<F3>Includes deferred income on Additional Loans of $5,578,309.
<F4>Unrealized gain on MBS.
<F5>Represents interest income on investments in mortgages and cash.
<F6>Includes $1,638,720 of amortization of prepaid fees and expenses.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Don PRINCE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-6221.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 13, 2002.

Decided June 18, 2002.

*650Vonno Lamar Gudger, III, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Mark C. Moore, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Don Prince seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Further, Prince’s claims raised for the first time on appeal are not cognizable because he has shown no exceptional circumstances. *Muth v. United States,*1 F.3d 246, 250 (1993). Accordingly, we deny Prince’s motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. *See United States v. Prince,*Nos. CR-96-122; CA-01-2047-3-17 (D.S.C. Dec. 5, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
WORLDPORT
                           THREE FIRST NATIONAL PLAZA
                                   SUITE 5600
                                CHICAGO, IL 60602



September 7, 1999



Mr. David Hickey
General Manager
Corporate Development
WorldPort Europe
11-12 Warrington Place
Dublin 2, Ireland

Dear David:

1.   Your salary increase of 15% should have been processed.

2.   In the event that WorldPort is acquired by a company other than Heico, and
     your position is eliminated within the first six months after being
     acquired, you will receive two-years salary and bonus.

3.   In the event that WorldPort is acquired by a company other than Heico, you
     receive 100% of your 1999 bonus.

/s/ Carl J. Grivner

Carl J. Grivner



Cjg/ses
§ 0.209 Disclosure of records or information. ( a ) Employees shall not disclose or use official information without proper authority. Employees authorized to make disclosures should respond promptly and courteously to requests from the public for information when permitted to do so by law.
( b ) Employees who have access to information that is classified for security reasons in accordance with Executive Order 13526, or any successor Executive Order governing Classified National Security Information, are responsible for its custody and safekeeping, and for assuring that it is not disclosed to unauthorized persons. *See* 18 U.S.C. 798; 50 U.S.C. 783(a); 31 CFR part 2.
# LI2019303EN.01000101.xml

| 25.11.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | LI 303/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.11.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

LI 303/1

---

COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2019/1943

of 25 November 2019

implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1686

imposing additional restrictive measures directed against ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaeda

and natural and legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2016/1686 of 20 September 2016 imposing additional restrictive measures directed against ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaeda and natural and legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them (1), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 20 September 2016 the Council adopted Regulation (EU) 2016/1686. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 20 September 2016 the Council adopted Regulation (EU) 2016/1686.

| (2) | In view of the continued threat posed by ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaeda and natural and legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them, one person should be added to the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies set out in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2016/1686. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In view of the continued threat posed by ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaeda and natural and legal persons, entities or bodies associated with them, one person should be added to the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies set out in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2016/1686.

| (3) | Regulation (EU) 2016/1686 should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Regulation (EU) 2016/1686 should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2016/1686 is amended as set out in the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 25 November 2019.

For the Council

The President

F. MOGHERINI

---

(1)  
  OJ L 255, 21.9.2016, p. 1.

1

---

ANNEX

The following entry is added to the list set out in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2016/1686:

| ‘5. | Guillaume PIROTTE; date of birth: 7 June 1994; place of birth: Grasse (France); nationality: French.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘5.

Guillaume PIROTTE; date of birth: 7 June 1994; place of birth: Grasse (France); nationality: French.’

---
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 115

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify the deduction for

business use of the home.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. MFUME introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify

the deduction for business use of the home.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF DEDUCTION FOR BUSINESS

4 USE OF THE HOME.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 208A(c)

6 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to excep7 tions for certain business or rental use) is amended by

8 adding at the end thereof the following: ‘‘For purposes of

9 subparagraph (A), in the case of a trade or business which

10 would not (but for this sentence) have a principal place
2

HR 115 IH

1 of business, its principal place of business shall be where

2 substantially all of the management activities for such

3 trade or business occur.’’

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

5 subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years beginning after

6 December 31, 1994.

Æ
#### § 1.822-9 Real estate owned and occupied.

Section 822(d)(1) provides that the amount allowable as a deduction for taxes, expenses, and depreciation on or with respect to any real estate owned and occupied in whole or in part by a mutual insurance company subject to the tax imposed by section 821 (a) or (c) shall be limited to an amount which bears the same ratio to such deduction (computed without regard to this limitation) as the rental value of the space not so occupied bears to the rental value of the entire property. For example, if the rental value of the space not occupied by the company is equal to one-half of the rental value of the entire property, the deduction for taxes, expenses, and depreciation is one-half of the taxes, expenses, and depreciation on account of the entire property. Where a deduction is claimed as provided in this section, the parts of the property occupied and the parts not occupied by the company, together with the respective rental values thereof, must be shown in a statement accompanying the return.

[T.D. 6681, 28 FR 11115, Oct. 17, 1963]
Electronically FiledIntermediate Court of AppealsCAAP-11-000068531-OCT-201210:33 AM
www.gpo.gov

### §386a. Adjustment of reimbursable debts; construction charges

The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and directed to adjust or eliminate reimbursable charges of the Government of the United States existing as debts against individual Indians or tribes of Indians in such a way as shall be equitable and just in consideration of all the circumstances under which such charges were made: *Provided*, That the collection of all construction costs against any Indian-owned lands within any Government irrigation project is hereby deferred, and no assessments shall be made on behalf of such charges against such lands until the Indian title thereto shall have been extinguished, and any construction assessments heretofore levied against such lands in accordance with the provisions of section 386 of this title, and uncollected, are hereby canceled: *Provided further*, That the Secretary shall report such adjustments and eliminations to the Congress not later than sixty calendar days following the end of the fiscal year in which they are made: *Provided further*, That any proceedings hereunder shall not be effective until approved by Congress unless Congress shall have failed to act favorably or unfavorably thereon by concurrent resolution within ninety calendar days after the filing of said report, in which case they shall become effective at the termination of the said ninety calendar days: *Provided further*, That the Secretary shall adjust or eliminate charges, defer collection of construction costs, and make no assessment on behalf of such charges for beneficiaries that hold leases on Hawaiian home lands, to the same extent as is permitted for individual Indians or tribes of Indians under this section.

(July 1, 1932, ch. 369, 47 Stat. 564; Pub. L. 97–375, title II, §208(a), Dec. 21, 1982, 96 Stat. 1824; Pub. L. 104–42, title II, §207, Nov. 2, 1995, 109 Stat. 364.)

#### Amendments

1995—Pub. L. 104–42 inserted before period at end “: *Provided further*, That the Secretary shall adjust or eliminate charges, defer collection of construction costs, and make no assessment on behalf of such charges for beneficiaries that hold leases on Hawaiian home lands, to the same extent as is permitted for individual Indians or tribes of Indians under this section”.

1982—Pub. L. 97–375, §208(a)(1), substituted “That the Secretary shall report such adjustments and eliminations to the Congress not later than sixty calendar days following the end of the fiscal year in which they are made” for “That a report shall be made to Congress annually, on the first Monday in December, showing adjustments so made during the preceding fiscal year” in second proviso.

Pub. L. 97–375, §208(a)(2), substituted “ninety calendar days” for “sixty legislative days” wherever appearing.

#### Section Referred to in Other Sections

This section is referred to in section 564*l* of this title; title 43 sections 620c, 1542.
40003.

#### ALLEN’S LITHOGRAPHING TRADE PLANT, INC. v. RAPID ROLLER COMPANY.

Decided April 2, 1963.

*Walter V. Beasley,*for plaintiff in error.

*Andrew A. Baumstark,*contra.

Eberhardt, Judge.

This is a verified suit on open account in which the defendant filed a verified general denial. The trial resulted in a verdict for plaintiff in the full amount. Defendant’s motion for new trial on the general and three special grounds was overruled and exception taken. *Held:*

1. The general grounds are not argued and are abandoned.

2. Special ground 1 complains that the judge expressed an opinion in the presence of the jury when he stated that defendant’s answer, a general denial only, was subject to a motion to strike and therefore that evidence as to failure of consideration could not be allowed. This opinion was one concerning the legal effect of a pleading; the opinions, expression of which is forbidden by *Code*§ 81-1104, are those relating to facts.

3. Special ground 2 is that the “court refused to allow the defendant to get into the question as to the quality of the blankets.” In addition to the infirmity mentioned above, i.e., general denial only filed, there is no showing of what the witness was expected to testify or the materiality of his testimony. Leverett, Hall & Christopher, Ga. Procedure & Practice, 491, § 22-4 (5).

4. “An exception based upon the refusal of the court to award a nonsuit will not be considered, where subsequently thereto the case is submitted to the jury, and after verdict being for the plaintiff a motion for new trial is made which presents the complaint that the verdict is contrary to the evidence and without evidence to support it.” *Venable v. Gresham,*105 Ga. App. 720 (3) (125 SE2d 507).

None of the grounds showing error, the judgment overruling the motion for new trial is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Felton, C.*</., *and Bussell, J., concur.*
EXHIBIT
32.1





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 Birch Branch, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Timothy Brasel,
President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge,:





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





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.





Date:           February
12, 2010





/s/Timothy
Brasel.


Timothy
Brasel


President,
Chief Executive Officer,


Chief
Financial Officer and Director
§ 1028.520 Special information sharing procedures to deter money laundering and terrorist activity for operators of credit card systems. ( a ) Refer to § 1010.520.
( b ) [Reserved]
#### In Rem Tax Foreclosure Action No. 44. Pysa Realty Corp., Appellant, v City of New York, Respondent.

[808 NYS2d 12]

*291Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saralee Evans, J.), entered March 26, 2004, which denied petitioner’s motion to vacate an in rem judgment of foreclosure granted on default, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Petitioner’s conclusory denial of receipt of notice of the foreclosure action was insufficient to rebut the presumption of receipt raised by the deed conveying title to the City *(see In Rem Tax Foreclosure Action No. 44, Borough of Bronx,*2 AD3d 241 [2003]). Moreover, here, the presumption of receipt became conclusive when, four months after entry of final judgment, petitioner had not yet instituted proceedings to set aside the deed *(see*Administrative Code of City of NY § 11-412.1 [h]). We note as well that petitioner has not substantiated its claim that the judgment of foreclosure was erroneously premised upon miscalculated delinquent tax assessments.

We have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Sullivan and Malone, JJ.