alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Die Matic Products, Inc., Respondent, v Flair International Corporation, Appellant.

[806 NYS2d 631]

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk *514County (Henry, J.), dated October 12, 2004, which denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and as a matter of discretion, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The record contains proof that the defendant served the plaintiff with a 90-day notice pursuant to CPLR 3216 by certified mail. Having been served with the 90-day notice, the plaintiff was required to comply with it by timely filing a note of issue, or by moving, before the default date, to vacate the notice or to extend the 90-day period pursuant to CPLR 2004 *(see Sharpe v Osorio,*21 AD3d 467, 468 [2005]; *McKinney v Corby,*295 AD2d 580, 581 [2002]). The plaintiff failed to do either. The defendant moved pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute.

In opposition to the motion, the plaintiffs attorney argued, in relevant part, that “[t]o the best of [his] knowledge,” the 90-day notice was never received by his office, that he “personally d[id] not recall” receiving the notice, and that he “looked through the file” but did not find the notice. The plaintiffs attorney acknowledged, however, that the notice “may have been received by [his] office in [his] absence” and that “it [was] possible that the Notice was mis-placed.” The plaintiffs attorney’s equivocal and unsubstantiated assertions failed to rebut the proof that the 90-day notice was properly mailed and the presumption of receipt *(see Sarva v Chakravorty,*14 AD3d 689, 690 [2005]; *Platonov v Sciabarra,*305 AD2d 651 [2003]; *Truscello v Olympia Constr.,*294 AD2d 350, 351 [2002]).

To avoid dismissal, the plaintiff was required to demonstrate a justifiable excuse for the failure to comply with the 90-day notice and a meritorious cause of action *(see*CPLR 3216 [e]; *Baczkowski v Collins Constr. Co.,*89 NY2d 499, 503 [1997]; *Werbin v Locicero,*287 AD2d 617, 618 [2001]). The plaintiff failed to make that showing. Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the motion to dismiss. H. Miller, J.P., Crane, Krausman, Rivera and Lifson, JJ., concur.
#### § 1030.100 Definitions.

Refer to § 1010.100 of this chapter for general definitions not noted herein.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsIdentifying decohering paths in closed quantum systemsA specific proposal is discussed for how to identify decohering paths in a wavefunction of the universe. The emphasis is on determining the correlations among subsystems and then considering how these correlations evolve. The proposal is similar to earlier ideas of Schroedinger and of Zeh, but in other ways it is closer to the decoherence functional of Griffiths, Omnes, and Gell-Mann and Hartle. There are interesting differences with each of these which are discussed. Once a given coarse-graining is chosen, the candidate paths are fixed in this scheme, and a single well defined number measures the degree of decoherence for each path. The normal probability sum rules are exactly obeyed (instantaneously) by these paths regardless of the level of decoherence. Also briefly discussed is how one might quantify some other aspects of classicality. The important role that concrete calculations play in testing this and other proposals is stressed.Document ID19900016374Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsAlbrecht, Andreas*(Fermi National Accelerator Lab. Batavia, IL, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJune 28, 1990Subject CategoryThermodynamics And Statistical PhysicsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:182853NASA-CR-182853FERMILAB-PUB-90/128-AAccession Number90N25690Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAGW-1340Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900016374.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
#### § 101.6 Return of the bullion.

After receiving the gold bullion from the Bureau of the Mint, the Assistant Secretary shall notify the petitioner that his petition has been approved and that payment of the smelting costs in an amount set forth in such notice must be made prior to the return of the bullion.
§ 100.9 Notices. ( a ) The Director may provide information pertaining to any mutilated currency submission to law enforcement officials or other third parties for purposes of investigation of related criminal activity or for purposes of seeking a civil judgment.
( b ) Whoever mutilates currency with the intent to render it unfit to be reissued may be fined and/or imprisoned. 18 U.S.C. 333.
( c ) Whoever intentionally files a false claim seeking reimbursement for mutilated currency may be held criminally liable under a number of statutes including 18 U.S.C. 287 and 18 U.S.C. 1341 and may be held civilly liable under 31 U.S.C. 3729, *et seq.*
#### §§ 1027.600-1027.670 [Reserved]
Page 2 of 3 

to determine the scope of work necessary to support Registration Review. In addition, HED 

conducted an open search to look for new literature relevant to the human-health risk assessment. 

“BASF” and “The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine” have submitted responses 

to the Chlorfenapyr Docket (Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0467) regarding HED’s humanhealth risk assessment scoping document for chlorfenapyr. 

CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS

The Agency thanks “BASF,” and “The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine” for 

their comments regarding HED’s human-health risk assessment scoping document for 

chlorfenapyr. The Agency has considered these comments and will utilize them, along with any 

newly available data, during the Registration Review of chlorfenapyr. 

DETAILED CONSIDERATIONS

BASF to the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory Public Docket. “Registration 

Review; Chlorfenapyr Docket Opened for Review and Comment. Docket Number: EPAHQ-OPP-2010-0467.” 23 June 2010. 

“BASF’s” comment: BASF has previously submitted a 28-day Dermal Toxicity study 

(466547020) and a 90-day Inhalation Toxicity study (46654701) for chlorfenapyr. 

HED’s Response: RAB1 confirms that the studies have been submitted, and they are currently 

under review. 

The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine to the Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P). “Registration Review; Chlorfenapyr Docket 

Opened for Review and Comment. Docket Number: EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0467.” 23 June 

2010. 

“The Physicians Committee For Responsible Medicine’s” comment: In advance of performing 

the 28-day dermal toxicity study, we urge the agency and the registrants to consider whether 

extrapolating from oral toxicity values is possible, given the current knowledge of the chemical’s 

dermal absorption factor and local effects. The agency should consider requesting in vitro

dermal penetration testing (see OECD Test Guideline 428 for example) to confirm this estimate 

of the extent of dermal penetration likely for Chlorfenapyr, instead of in vivo dermal penetration. 

Results can also be confirmed using bridging data from other appropriate pyrroles. While such a 

strategy will not be appropriate in all cases, assessing potential (lack of) dermal penetration is 

one strategy to avoid systemic dermal testing for cases where penetration of the material, and 

thus resultant systemic toxicity, is inconsequential. 

HED’s Response: Since the drafting of the most recent scoping document for chlorfenapyr, the 

new 28-day Dermal toxicity study has been submitted and identified in our databases. It is 

currently under review, and this study will impact future registrations for chlorfenapyr. With the 

incorporation of this route-specific study into future hazard assessments, we don’t anticipate the 
Page 3 of 3 

need for the data recommended in the letter from “The Physicians Committee for Responsible 

Medicine.” 

cc: Anwar Y. Dunbar (RAB1) 

RDI: D. Vogel (04-NOV-10) 

Anwar Y. Dunbar: S10952:PY-S:(703)603-0611:7509P:RAB1
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 17-12250

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:16-cr-00018-WS-B-2

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JACQUELINE BUSTAMANTE,

Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Alabama

________________________

(February 28, 2018)

Before TJOFLAT, NEWSOM and HULL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The Government’s motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to the appeal 

waiver in Appellant’s plea agreement is GRANTED. See United States v. Bushert, 

997 F.2d 1343, 1350-51 (11th Cir. 1993) (sentence appeal waiver will be enforced 
2

if it was made knowingly and voluntarily); United States v. Grinard-Henry, 399 

F.3d 1294, 1296 (11th Cir. 2005) (waiver of the right to appeal includes waiver of 

the right to appeal difficult or debatable legal issues or even blatant error). 

Furthermore, and in any event, Appellant Bustamante’s unconditional guilty plea 

waived her right to challenge the district court’s denial of her motion to suppress. 

United States v. Ternus, 598 F.3d 1251, 1254 (11th Cir. 2010); United States v. 

Charles, 757 F.3d 1222, 1227 n.4 (11th Cir. 2014); United States v. McCoy, 477 

F.2d 550, 551 (5th Cir. 1973).
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1076

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow the installment method

to be used to report income from the sale of certain residential real

property, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 28, 1995

Mr. GOODLING (for himself, Mr. UNDERWOOD, Mr. MCDADE, Mr. GENE

GREEN of Texas, Mr. FATTAH, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. PAYNE

of Virginia, Mrs. MORELLA, Mr. BARCIA, Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania, Mr.

ROMERO-BARCELO ́, Mr. BORSKI, and Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA) 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 allow the

installment method to be used to report income from

the sale of certain residential real property, and for

other purposes.

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 ‘‘First-Time Home5 buyers Assistance Act’’.
2

•HR 1076 IH

1 SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY OF INSTALLMENT METHOD OF AC2 COUNTING TO CERTAIN SALES OF RESIDEN3 TIAL REAL PROPERTY.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (2) of section 453(l)

5 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to excep6 tions to dealer dispositions) is amended by redesignating

7 subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D) and by inserting

8 after subparagraph (B) the following new subparagraph:

9 ‘‘(C) CERTAIN RESIDENCES.—The disposi10 tion on the installment plan of any 1-family res11 idential real property in the ordinary course of

12 the taxpayer’s business if—

13 ‘‘(i) the acquisition cost (as defined in

14 section 143(k)(3)) does not exceed 75 per15 cent of the median purchase price for

16 newly constructed 1-family residential real

17 property for the statistical area (as defined

18 in section 143(k)(2)) in which the property

19 is located (95 percent in the case of a

20 property in a targeted area within the

21 meaning of section 143(j)),

22 ‘‘(ii) the face amount of any obliga23 tion held by the taxpayer and arising from

24 the disposition does not exceed 20 percent

25 of such acquisition cost,
3

•HR 1076 IH

1 ‘‘(iii) the purchaser of the property is

2 financially qualified to assume 100 percent

3 of the obligations arising from the disposi4 tion (without regard to whether such obli5 gations are held by the taxpayer),

6 ‘‘(iv) the property is to be used by

7 such purchaser as a principal residence

8 (within the meaning of section 1034), and

9 ‘‘(v) such purchaser had no present

10 ownership interest in such a principal resi11 dence during the 3-year period ending on

12 the date of acquisition of the property.’’

13 (b) EFFECT OF PLEDGE OF INSTALLMENT OBLIGA14 TION.—Paragraph (1) of section 453A(d) of such Code

15 (relating to pledges, etc., of installment obligations) is

16 amended by inserting after ‘‘this section applies’’ the fol17 lowing: ‘‘(or any installment obligation arising from a dis18 position described in section 453(l)(2)(C))’’.

19 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

20 this section shall apply to sales after the date of the enact21 ment of this Act.

Æ
#### § 35.1 Purpose.

This part implements sections 602 and 603 of the Social Security Act, as added by section 9901 of the American Rescue Plan Act (Subtitle M of Title IX of Pub. L. 117-2) and amended by section 102 of Division LL of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328).
A. Ray Petty, Ed.D. P. O. Box 

### 266 Mercedita PR 

### 00715-0266 araypetty@msn.com I**h~r~by** petition.the**Depa~ment** ofTransportation for.review oftheirorder**un.~~r t.~~** **D~p!artment;s5**

## 3 AViation Economic Regulations, 

### 14 CFR 

### 385.50, to terminate the present Cape

## Alr'EA~~eM(e

# Po**t~** Mercedita Airport in Ponce, Puerto Rico. Iam a resident of Ponce, Puerto Rico and utilize the Cape Air Flights from Ponce to San Juan on a regular basis. There are many reasons for my choosing this means oftravel: 1. Puerto Rico is unique in qualifying for Essential Air Service inclusion. Unlike the continental United States, the only form oftravel from Puerto Rico to other points within the country is by airplane. It is impossible to leave Puerto Rico by car, train, passenger boat or bus. 2. There is NO public transportation between Ponce and San Juan. 3. The drive, during morning orevening rush hours, is morethan 3 hours forthe 

### 75 mile trip. 4. There are 2 Jet Blue flights from Ponce, but restrict direct travel to either Orlando of NYC, requiring additional transfers, ticketing and waittime. 

### 5. The Jet Blue flights require us to travel hours to a hub, when one is but 

### 20 minutes away. As an example: to fly to neighboring St. Thomas we have to fly to Orlando - then San Juan - then St Thomas orworse yetvia Philadelphia??? 6. The Jet Blue flights require passengers to arise at an ungodly hour - 3 a.m. - to arrive at the Mercedita Airport atthe designated time. 7. Driving to the airport at this darkened hour restricts us senior citizens who suffer from night blindness, making ourtravel prohibited 

### by a physical disability. 8. Flying from Ponce restricts our airline selection to a travel monopoly - Jet Blue, while in San Juan we can choose from American, (my preferred airline where I am a 

### 1,000,000 mile flyer) Continental, Delta and United, among others. By eliminatingthe Cape Airflights the DOT is in effectterminating EAS service to Ponce as the substitution ofJet Blue service does not meetthe requirements of Public Law 

### 100-223 including (e) "flights at reasonable timestaking into accountthe needs ofpassengers with connecting flights." Thank you foryourattention tothis matter.

Cc: 

### Pedro 

### R. Pierluisi, Resident Commissioner
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 JACOBS  FINANCIAL  GROUP,  INC. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended  August 31, 2007 (the  "Report")
filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission,  I, John M. Jacobs,  Chief
Executive Officer 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:

     (1) The Company's  Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section
13(a) or 15(d) 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.



         October 22, 2007                           /s/ John M. Jacobs
                                                    ------------------------
                                                        John M. Jacobs
                                                        Chief Executive Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1235 Introduced in House (IH)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 1235

           To terminate the price support program for honey.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 14, 1995

Mr. Zimmer (for himself, Mr. Armey, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Miller of Florida, 
  Mr. Upton, and Mr. Fawell) introduced the following bill; which was 
                referred to the Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           To terminate the price support program for honey.

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

SECTION 1. TERMINATION OF HONEY PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAM.

    (a) Termination.--Sections 207 and 405A of the Agricultural Act of 
1949 (7 U.S.C. 1446h and 1425a, respectively) are repealed.
    (b) Payment Limitations.--Section 1001(2) of the Food Security Act 
of 1985 (7 U.S.C. 1308(2)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (B)(iii), by striking ``(other than 
        honey)''; and
            (2) by striking subparagraph (C).
    (c) Designated Nonbasic Agricultural Commodities.--Section 201(a) 
of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1446(a)) is amended by 
striking ``honey,''.
    (d) Other Nonbasic Agricultural Commodities.--Section 301 of the 
Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C. 1447) is amended by inserting after 
``nonbasic agricultural commodity'' the following: ``(other than 
honey)''.
    (e) Definitions.--Section 408(k) of the Agricultural Act of 1949 (7 
U.S.C. 1428(k)) is amended by striking ``honey,'' each place it 
appears.
    (f) Powers of Commodity Credit Corporation.--Section 5(a) of the 
Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act (15 U.S.C. 714c(a)) is amended 
by inserting after ``agricultural commodities'' the following: ``(other 
than honey)''.
    (g) Transition.--The amendments made by this section shall not 
affect the liability of any person under any provision of law as in 
effect before the effective date of this section.
    (h) Prohibition on Subsequent Price Support.--After the effective 
date of this section, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
Secretary of Agriculture shall not provide price support, loans, or 
payments for honey by using the funds of the Commodity Credit 
Corporation or under the authority of any law.
    (i) Effective Date.--This section and the amendments made by this 
section shall take effect on enactment.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 1010.320 Reports of suspicious transactions.

Each financial institution (as defined in 31 U.S.C. 5312(a)(2) or (c)(1)) should refer to subpart C of its financial institution part in this chapter for any additional suspicious transaction reporting requirements.
- Office Home
- About Us
- Information for Journalists

HomeOffice of Press Operations...About Us – Office of Press Operations

# 									About Us – Office of Press Operations							

Office of Press Operations

The Office of Press Operations supports the President and Secretary of State by explaining the foreign policy of the United States and the positions of the Department of State to domestic and foreign journalists. The office also provides logistical support and expertise to the Secretary of State and other Department officials for events involving media coverage/participation.

Specifically, the Press Office responds to press queries, conducts media interviews, monitors media for breaking international events, and coordinates special press briefings and conference calls. They also support the Secretary of State’s public events in addition to those of the Deputy Secretary and other senior Department officials.

In addition, the Press Office coordinates interview requests from the national media for senior State Department officials other than the Secretary of State. The staff proactively pitches interviews on a wide variety of issues to national media outlets and places editorials in major U.S. newspapers.

Tags

Office of Press Operations

Back to Top
HomeThe Secretary of StateRemarks & Releases...Aruba National Day

# 									Aruba National Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

March 20, 2023

On behalf of the United States of America, I send best wishes to the people of Aruba on your celebration of the 37th anniversary of your National Anthem and Flag Day.

The United States is committed to its long-standing and enduring partnership with Aruba.  We are proud of our work together to weaken transnational criminal networks, combat illicit activities, and support a safe, secure, and prosperous Caribbean region.  Building strong educational and cultural ties between our two nations is a shared priority, symbolized by our EducationUSA advising center and buttressed by the friendships built through generations of two-way tourism and common values.  We are committed to working together with Aruba to confront the climate crisis and look forward to collaborating through both public and private engagement to meet Aruba’s bold renewable energy goals.

In recognition of Aruba’s National Anthem and Flag Day, the United States hopes for a happy and prosperous year to come for all Arubans.

Tags

ArubaOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
§ 19.725 How much time do I have to contest a suspension? ( a ) As a respondent you or your representative must either send, or make rrangements to appear and present, the information and argument to the suspending official within 30 days after you receive the Notice of Suspension.
( b ) We consider the notice to be received by you— ( 1 ) When delivered, if we mail the notice to the last known street address, or five days after we send it if the letter is undeliverable;
( 2 ) When sent, if we send the notice by facsimile or five days after we send it if the facsimile is undeliverable; or
( 3 ) When delivered, if we send the notice by e-mail or five days after we send it if the e-mail is undeliverable.
#### § 20.610 Controlled substance.

*Controlled substance* means a controlled substance in schedules I through V of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812), and as further defined by regulation at 21 CFR 1308.11 through 1308.15.
#### § 1030.200 General.

Housing government sponsored enterprises are subject to the program requirements set forth and cross referenced in this subpart. Housing government sponsored enterprises should also refer to subpart B of part 1010 of this chapter for program requirements contained in that subpart that apply to housing government sponsored enterprises.