alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeBiographies...Abraham Dashtara

# 				Abraham Dashtara			

															Acting Managing Director , Regional and Global Issues Directorate						Office of Foreign Assistance												

				March 4, 2024 -									Present							

Abraham Dashtara is serving as acting Managing Director for Regional and Global Issues in the Office of Foreign Assistance (F).  In this capacity, he is responsible for leading several units that oversee the full range of budget planning and resource allocation for global U.S. foreign assistance resources — totaling more than $40 billion annually.

Abraham is a career civil servant with 17 years of federal service including more than a decade of experience on U.S. foreign assistance issues, including as the Regional Director for Near Eastern Affairs in F since 2019 and acting Senior Advisor to the Director and Deputy Director of Foreign Assistance on strategic resourcing matters.   Prior to that, he served in F as a Coordinator covering a range of countries in the Middle East and North Africa, including Tunisia and Syria, and the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, Office of Assistance Coordination (NEA/AC).

Before joining the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) in 2012, Abraham served as an analyst in the Broadcasting Board of Governor’s (now U.S. Agency for Global Media) Office of the Chief Financial Officer where he joined in 2007 as part of the Student Career Experience Program.  Abraham is a northern Virginia native and holds a Bachelor of Arts in Government and International Politics from the George Mason University.

Tags

State Department Official

Back to Top
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1011

AN ACT

To extend the deadline under the Federal Power

electric project in the State of Ohio.Act applicable to the construction of a hydro-
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1011

AN ACT

To extend the deadline under the Federal Power Act applicable to the construction of a hydroelectric project in the

State of Ohio.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 1011 EH

1 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE.

2 Notwithstanding the time limitations of section 13 of

3 the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) the Federal En4 ergy Regulatory Commission, upon the request of the li5 censee for FERC Project No. 9423 (and after reasonable

6 notice), is authorized, in accordance with the good faith,

7 due diligence, and public interest requirements of such

8 section 13 and the Commission’s procedures under such

9 section, to extend the time required for commencement of

10 construction for the project for up to a maximum of 3

11 consecutive 2-year periods. This section shall take effect

12 for the project upon the expiration of the extension (issued

13 by the Commission under such section 13) of the period

14 required for commencement of construction of such

15 project.

Passed the House of Representatives November 13,

1995.

Attest:

Clerk.
Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

§ 328.6 Requirements for endorsement. ( a ) *On bearer securities.* The endorsement must be imprinted in the lefthand portion of the face of each security with the first line thereof parallel to the left edge of the security and in such manner as to be clearly legible and in such position that it will not obscure the serial number, series designation, or other identifying data, and cover the smallest possible portion of the text on the face of the security. The dimensions of the endorsement should be approximately 4 inches in width and 11 ⁄ 2 inches in height, and must be imprinted by stamp or plate of such character as will render the endorsement substantially ineradicable. The name of the Federal Reserve bank of the district must appear on the plate or stamp used for the imprinting of the endorsement, and presentation to the appropriate branch of the Federal Reserve bank named will be considered as presentation to the bank. When securities are to be presented to the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, the words “United States Treasury” should be used in lieu of the words “Federal Reserve Bank of _______, Fiscal Agent of the United States.” No subsequent endorsement will be recognized. If the form of endorsement on a security is different than that prescribed in § 328.5, the provisions of §§ 328.7 and 328.8 shall not apply to the security.
( b ) *On coupons.* Unmatured coupons attached to restrictively endorsed securities should be canceled by imprinting the prescribed endorsement in such manner that a substantial portion of the endorsement will appear on each such coupon. If any such coupons are missing, deduction of their face amount will be made in cases of redemption, and in cases of exchange, remittance equal to the face amount of the missing coupons must accompany the securities. All matured coupons, including coupons which will mature on or before the date of redemption or exchange (except as otherwise specifically provided in an announcement of an exchange offering), should be detached from securities upon which restrictive endorsements are to be imprinted.
#### Patrick McKenna, Respondent, *against*Helena M. Edmundstone, Impleaded, &c., Appellant.

(Decided April 3rd, 1882.)

The Mechanics’ Lien Law of 1875 (L. 1875, c. 379), applicable to the City of New York, being a local and special act, is not repealed by implication by the general act of 1880 (L. 1880, c. 486), on the same subject, applying to all the cities of the state except the City of Búllalo.

Appeal from an order of this court denying a motion to discharge a mechanics’ lion.

The plaintiff having filed a mechanics’ lien against property of the defendant, this motion was made by the defendant to discharge the lien upon executing and filing a bond for that purpose, pursuant to the lien act of 1875 (L. 1875, c. 379, § 18, subd. 4). The motion was denied on the ground that the general lien act of 1880 (L. 1880, c. 486) did not authorize the application. From the order denying her motion the defendant appealed.

*411J. F. Daly, J.

The act of 1880 (L. 1880, c. 486), applies to all the cities of the state save the city of Buffalo, which is expressly excepted, and contains provisions for discharging liens filed under it, but there is no provision such as is contained in the lien act of 1875, applicable exclusively to the city of New York, permitting the discharge of the lien upon the owner executing and filing a bond. It is claimed by the appellant, that the statute of 1880 is a general act and does not repeal the statute of 1875, which is a special enactment for the city of New York, according to the familiar rule that a special and local act will not be deemed repealed by implication in consequence of the passage of a general law covering the subject (Wh*ipple*v. Christian, 80 N. Y. 523 ; *In re, The Evergreens,*47 N. Y. 216 ; *Bowen*v. *Lease,*5 Hill, 225 ; *Village of Gloversville*v. *Howell,*70 N. Y. 287; *In re, Delaware, &c. Canal Co.,*69 N. Y. 209; *Van Denburgh*v. *Village of Greenbush,*66 N. Y. 1; *Matter of Comm’rs of Central Park,*50 N. Y. 493).

The cases of *Whipple*v. *Christian,*and *Van Denburgh*v. *Village of Greenbush,*were decisions upon questions arise eing upon successive 'mechanics’ lien acts in other parts of th state, and the expressions contained in the opinions are broad enough to warrant all that appellant claims, although the decision in each case was put upon an additional ground that rendered discussion of the point here involved unnecessary. As all the judges concurred in the opinions delivered by Earl, J., in the second case, and all but he (he not voting) concurred in the opinion of Danforth, J., in the first case, we have a satisfactory statement of the views of the court on this subject. It is said that a general act concerning the acquiring and enforcing of mechanics’ liens does not repeal, by implication, a prior local statute embracing the same subject. Under this construction the statute of 1875, applicable to the city of New York only, would be in force notwithstanding the general act of 1880, and the court had power to grant the motion.

Van Brtjnt, P. J., concurred.

Order reversed, without costs.
§ 562.404 Transactions ordinarily incident to a licensed transaction authorized. Any transaction ordinarily incident to a licensed transaction and necessary to give effect thereto is also authorized, except: ( a ) An ordinarily incident transaction, not explicitly authorized within the terms of the license, by or with a person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to § 562.201; or
( b ) An ordinarily incident transaction, not explicitly authorized within the terms of the license, involving a debit to a blocked account or a transfer of blocked property.
HomeOffice of the Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage AffairsRemarks & Releases...Community of Democracies 33rd Meeting of the Governing Council

# 									Community of Democracies 33rd Meeting of the Governing Council							

Press Statement

Roger D. Carstens, Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs

April 20, 2021

Thank you to Community of Democracies presidency Romania and the Permanent Secretariat for organizing this meeting and for including this important and timely topic on the agenda.  Parliamentary Secretary Oliphant, thank you for those remarks and for highlighting the seriousness of this issue. Finally, thank you to Canada for your leadership in uniting so many countries to stand together against the practice of arbitrary detention for political leverage.

This is a grave issue we are discussing. As Secretary Blinken said at the launch of the Declaration Against Arbitrary Detention in State-to-State Relations, human beings are not bargaining chips. The practice undermines respect for human rights. It brings anguish to families. It breaks trust. Using arbitrary detentions for political leverage is an unacceptable practice we must not tolerate.

The United States has built a hostage recovery enterprise to counter issues like this. For years we have condemned some countries’ use of people as political leverage. But unified with other partners we are all much stronger.

I echo Canada’s call to endorse the Declaration. We must stop trying to counter this practice on a case by case basis, and instead stand together in solidarity to send the message that we will not allow our citizens to be used as political pawns.

We are stronger together. Through partnership and cooperation, we can put an end to this practice. We look forward to the next steps, to collaborating with partners, and to taking action together.

Tags

Office of the Special Presidential Envoy for Hostage Affairs

Back to Top
* 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

April 20, 2005

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-41474

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

VICTOR ACUNA-CARBAJAL,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:04-CR-276-ALL

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

Before SMITH, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Victor Acuna-Carbajal appeals his conviction and sentence

for possession with intent to distribute over 100 kilograms of

marijuana. Acuna-Carbajal contends that 21 U.S.C. § 841 is

facially unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530

U.S. 466 (2000). As Acuna-Carbajal concedes, his argument is

foreclosed by circuit precedent. See United States v. Slaughter,

238 F.3d 580, 582 (5th Cir. 2000). He raises the issue only to
No. 04-41474

-2-

preserve it for Supreme Court review. The district court’s

judgment is AFFIRMED.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Assistant Secretary Robinson’s Travel to Italy and Malta

# 											Assistant Secretary Robinson’s Travel to Italy and Malta									

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

November 27, 2023

Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) Todd D. Robinson will travel to Italy and Malta from November 28 – December 1.

In Italy, Assistant Secretary Robinson will participate in a panel discussion at the Partnership Forum that commemorates the 40th anniversary of the International Development Law Organization (IDLO). In Malta, he will highlight the strong cooperation between U.S. and Maltese authorities to counter trafficking and smuggling, and to maintain a strong financial regulatory environment. He will also meet with judicial, law enforcement, security, and media representatives in Malta promoting rule of law reforms. For further information, please contact INL-PAPD@state.gov or visit @StateINL on Twitter/X.

Tags

Bureau of European and Eurasian AffairsBureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement AffairsCombating Drugs and CrimeCounternarcoticsDrug TraffickingItalyLaw EnforcementMaltaNarcoticsOffice of the SpokespersonOfficial International Travel

Back to Top
#### Peggy Jo Williams v. Herbert Williams

5-4704

432 S.W. 2d 830

Opinion Delivered October 28, 1968

*476
      *Little, Enfield*& *Lawrence*for appellant.

*Jeff Duty*for appellee.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

This appeal is from a decree granting' a divorce to the appellant on the ground of three years separation, awarding her the custody of the parties’ three children, increasing a prior support allowance from $70 to $100 a month, reducing the husband’s previous delinquent payments to judgment, dissolving the tenancy by the entirety that formerly existed as to the family homestead, and directing that the homestead be sold and the proceeds be divided between the parties.

The appellant makes two contentions for reversal. First, she argues that the monthly support allowance should have been increased to $150 instead of to $100. This argument is based upon the appellee’s testimony that it takes at least $150 a month to provide support for the children. That, however, is not the sole pertinent consideration. The husband’s ability to pay must also be taken into account. Williams testified without contradiction that he earns only $56.01 a week and that his own living expenses exceed that amount. The decree requires him to pay $100 a month for the children’s support and to carry hospitalization coverage for their bene*477fit, which costs $12.55 a month. We are unable to say that the chancellor’s decision is against the weight of the evidence. His division of the available income appears to be as fair as the circumstances permit.

Secondly, the appellant contends that her money judgment for delinquent support payments should have been declared to be a lien upon the appellee’s share of the proceeds to be derived from the sale of the homestead. The court was right in rejecting that contention. The constitution is specific in declaring that the homestead shall not be subject to the lien of any judgment or decree, with certain exceptions that do not apply here. Ark. Const., Art. 9, § 3. In *Massengale*v. *Massengale,*186 Ark. 917, 56 SW. 2d 763 (1933), we held that a judgment for accrued alimony “was of no more force than any other judgment, and had no more validity against the homestead than any other judgment.” The principle of that case is controlling, because neither a judgment for alimony nor a judgment for child support is among the enumerated exceptions to the homestead exemption.

Affirmed.
114 STAT. 1898 PUBLIC LAW 106–427—NOV. 4, 2000

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.J. Res. 124:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):

Nov. 3, considered and passed House and Senate.

Æ

Public Law 106–427

106th Congress

Joint Resolution

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 2001, and for other

purposes.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That Public Law

106–275, is further amended by striking the date specified in section

106(c) and inserting ‘‘November 4, 2000’’.

Approved November 4, 2000.

Ante, p. 1897.

Nov. 4, 2000

[H.J. Res. 124]
#### Gale O'CONNELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 99-35374.

D.C. No. CV-96-00143-DWM/RFC.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*367Submitted Jan. 10, 2001.*

Decided Feb. 14, 2001.

Before MCKEOWN, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Gale O’Connell appeals the judgment of the district court affirming the decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration to deny O’Connell’s application for disability benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. “We review de novo the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner’s denial of benefits.” *Morgan v. Comm’r of the Soc. Sec. Admin.,*169 F.3d 595, 599 (9th Cir.1999). The order will be overturned only if it is not supported by substantial evidence or is based on legal error. *See Schneider v. Comm’r of the Soc. Sec. Admin.,*223 F.3d 968, 973 (9th Cir.2000).

“The ALJ [Administrative Law Judge] is responsible for determining credibility, resolving conflicts in medical testimony, and for resolving ambiguities.” *Meanel v. Apfel,*172 F.3d 1111, 1113 (9th Cir.1999) (citation omitted). “If a claimant produces evidence that he suffers from an ailment that could cause pain, ‘the ALJ can reject the claimant’s testimony about the severity of [his] symptoms only by offering specific, clear and convincing reasons for doing so.” ’ *Light v. Soc. Sec. Admin.,*119 F.3d 789, 792 (9th Cir.1997) (alteration in original) (citation omitted). *368“The ALJ must specifically identify what testimony is credible and what testimony undermines the claimant’s complaints.” *Morgan,*169 F.3d at 599.

The ALJ’s reasons for rejecting O’Connell’s pain testimony were slender and insufficient. The magistrate judge correctly noted that the ALJ did not set forth specific, clear and convincing reasons for rejecting O’Connell’s pain complaints. Nevertheless, the magistrate judge recommended that remand was not warranted because specific, cogent reasons to support the ALJ’s ruling were readily found in the record. The district court adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

The district court erred in adopting the recommendation to uphold the ALJ’s ruling. In order to discredit O’Connell’s pain testimony, the ALJ, not the magistrate judge or the district court, was required to identify and articulate clear and specific reasons for doing so. *See id.*Because the ALJ failed to sufficiently articulate the basis for an adverse credibility finding, we reverse the district court and remand with directions to the ALJ to make adequate findings.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
§ 558.307 Licenses; general and specific. ( a ) Except as otherwise provided in this part, the term *license* means any license or authorization contained in or issued pursuant to this part.
( b ) The term *general license* means any license or authorization the terms of which are set forth in subpart E of this part or made available on OFAC's website: *www.treas.gov/ofac .*
( c ) The term *specific license* means any license or authorization issued pursuant to this part but not set forth in subpart E of this part or made available on OFAC's website: *www.treas.gov/ofac .*
Note 1 to § 558.307 .
*See* § 501.801 of this chapter on licensing procedures.
- Bureau Home
- About Us
- Leadership
- Key Topics
- Global Health Security and Diplomacy
- Front Office
- SCE
- PEPFAR

HomeBureau of Global Health Security and Diplomacy...Front Office

# 									Front Office							

Bureau of Global Health Security and Diplomacy

## Executive Office (EX)

Our office provides support to the entire bureau, focusing on service and hiring and personnel operations.  Support includes travel, domestic support, and operational budget planning and execution.

Back to Top
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 26, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 131263 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 131263 COA: 260154 Wayne CC: 04-008748-02 JUSTIN JOHN WOOD, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 20, 2006 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

d0918 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 26, 2006

Clerk
UNITED STATES

BATHYMETRIC MAP PRIBILOF CANYON

PRIBILOF CANYON
NOS NN 2:2
Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter II
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 78 FR 60697, Oct. 2, 2013.

§ 248.7 Claims requiring settlement action. There are certain types of claims on which the disbursing officer will not be authorized to take final action. These include: ( a ) Claims on original checks which have been outstanding more than one full fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the checks were issued, and
( b ) Claims involving doubtful questions of law and fact.
In such cases the disbursing officer will obtain information and supporting papers, including an undertaking of indemnity, from the claimant and transmit such data to the Claims Division, General Accounting Office, for settlement action.
HomeOffice of Diversity and Inclusion...Office of Diversity and Inclusion__trashed  Releases

# Office of Diversity and Inclusion Releases

30 items

        -    Media Note  		Department of State Reaches Settlement Resolving Longstanding Claims of Disability Discrimination Relating to Its Worldwide Availability Requirement for Career Department of State Foreign Service Applicants	  January 17, 2023 
        -    Other Release  		Allyship Disability Inclusion: From State’s Leaders and Colleagues	  December 5, 2022 
        -    DipNote  		Celebrating Two Years of the Artemis Accords	  October 13, 2022 
        -    DipNote  		Roots and Reflections	  October 12, 2022 
        -    Media Note  		A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words: Photojournalists through the International Visitor Leadership Program Contribute to Credible Narratives around COVID-19, Democracy, and Inclusion	  October 12, 2022 
        -    DipNote  		Following in Her Father’s Footsteps	  October 12, 2022 
        -    DipNote  		Space for All: Using Diplomacy to Bridge the Space Divide	  Jennifer R. LittlejohnOctober 7, 2022 
        -    DipNote  		The Action We Are Taking for the Future of the Planet	  Monica MedinaOctober 3, 2022 
        -    DipNote  		On the Margins of UNGA: Side Events Highlight Human Rights Priorities	  September 27, 2022 
        -    Remarks  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken At the United Nations LGBTI Core Group Event	  Antony J. BlinkenSeptember 19, 2022Cervantes CenterNew York, New York 

previous page123next page

Back to Top