alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2695 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2695

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
   the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-six

                                 An Act

 
  To extend the deadline under the Federal Power Act applicable to the 
     construction of certain hydroelectric projects in the State of 
                              Pennsylvania.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE.

    (a) Extension.--Notwithstanding the time limitations of section 13 
of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806), upon the request of the 
licensee for the project concerned, and after reasonable notice, the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission shall, in accordance with the good 
faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of such section 
13 and the Commission's procedures under such section, extend the time 
required for commencement of construction of each the following 
projects until September 26, 1999:
        (1) FERC Project No. 4474.
        (2) FERC Project No. 7041.
    (b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect for the project 
upon the expiration of the extension (issued by the Commission under 
section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806)) of the period 
required for commencement of construction of the project concerned.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
HomeDSS Press Releases...Derry Man Pleads Guilty to Passport Fraud and Hacking a Telecommunications Company

# 									Derry Man Pleads Guilty to Passport Fraud and Hacking a Telecommunications Company							

Department of Justice Release

November 28, 2023

For Immediate Release – November 28, 2023

Click here to read more about this

 

Tags

DSS ReleasesFraudNew HampshirePassportsUnited States

Back to Top
#### Greenough’s Appeal.

A preferred debt, tliougb not presented for payment within a year from the death of the debtor, is entitled to be paid in full, out of assets in the hands of the administrator of an insolvent.

A claim for money, payable as rent, by a co-tenant, for the privilege of talcing coal out of a mine at so much per cubic yard, is a preferred debt under the act.

Appeal from the Orphans’ Court of Luzerne.

*July*11.

The administratrix of Thomas had a sum of money in her hands for distribution among the creditors of the estate, which was insolvent. Thomas died in *1844;*administration was granted in 1845, and the usual advertisements were made. The appellants’ claim was for rent that accrued in the lifetime of Thomas, under an agreement, “that Thomas may have the privilege of taking coal out of the P. mine, he paying to the respective owners thereof (of whom Thomas was one) their respective proportions of the sum of twenty-five cents per cubic yard of coal so taken out, as rent for the said privilege.” This was determinable on one month’s notice by either party, and “ the rent” was to be paid quarterly.

The claim for the rent was not presented to the administratrix until 1847, on which ground the auditor rejected it. But the court allowed the lessor a *fro rata*dividend with the other creditors, considering the claim as not preferred within the act of Assembly.

*Harrison*Wright, for appellant.

McOlintooh, contó.

Per, Curiam.

Debts which do not abate *fro*rata, when payment is to be made out of the assets of an insolvent estate, are not within the spirit of the act which requires presentation for settlement within the year. The question then is, whether the appellants’ claim was a privileged one; and that depends on the nature of their contract with the decedent. It was the grant of a right to mine coal for so much the ton; and the *redditus*was consequently a certain rent for which a distress might have been made. In substance, it was as distinctly a lease as that in Offerman *v.*
      *19Starr; nor is that case distinguishable from this in any respect, except that in the one the lease Ayas to a co-tenant, and in the other it Ayas to a stranger. But it is certain that one joint tenant or tenant in common may lease his part to his felloAy. The whole claim therefore ought to have been alloAyed.

Decree corrected accordingly.
40927.

#### COLEVINS et al. v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA.

*534Decided October 23, 1964.

*535
      *George*Carroll, for plaintiffs in error.

*Smith, Bing el, Martin, Ansley ■& Carr, Hoke Smith,*contra.

Felton, Chief Judge.

The court did not err in overruling the plaintiffs’ motion for a judgment n.o.v. on the question whether the insurance company owed interest on the amount of $5,500, the amount of loss ascertained by the appraisers, which was tendered into the registry of the court as its ultimate liability, and not as an amount to be credited on the amount of loss found by the jury. The plaintiffs sought to avoid the appraisal and succeeded in doing so. For this reason they cannot now contend that the amount of the appraisal represented any amount owed by the insurance company. Furthermore, the tender of the $5,500 was made on the condition that it be accepted as full and complete settlement of all sums due by it under the policy. The tender was not accepted and the amount fixed by the jury was the liquidated sum found to be due and it does not bear interest until after the jury verdict liquidating the amount recoverable. *Fireman’s Ins. Co. v. Oliver, 182*Ga. 212 (184 SE 858).

The court overruled the plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial because his charge to the jury to the effect that the court fixed the amount of damages and attorney’s fees was harmless. Under the facts of this case it was erroneous. But, it was also harmless because the evidence authorized the jury to find the loss to be substantially less than the $9,500 demanded by the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs do not dispute that in such a case no bad faith can be found in refusal to pay a demand substantially higher than a jury was authorized to find the loss to be but they contend that it is the law of this case, by which all parties should be bound, that there was a question of bad faith in refusal to pay because the court overruled the insurance company’s motion for a directed verdict on the question of damages and attorney’s fees. We cannot agree with this contention for the reason that *536the jury verdict was in favor of the insurance company on the question of damages and attorney’s fees and it was precluded from testing the correctness of the judge’s refusal to direct a verdict for it on the question of damages and attorney’s fees and we have not been cited to any authority holding that a-party can except to a finding in his favor in order to prevent a ruling against him from becoming the law of the case where the finding in his favor is due to an error of the trial court made against the opposite party. Until we find authority to the contrary we hold that a judgment which cannot be reviewed cannot become the law of the case.

The court did not err in overruling the plaintiff’s motions for a judgment n.o.v. and for a new trial.

*Judgments affirmed.*

*Frankum and Pannell, JJ., concur.*
HomeBiographies...Laura Lochman

# 				Laura Lochman			

															Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary						Bureau of Energy Resources												

				July 1, 2023 -									Present							

Tags

Bureau of Energy ResourcesState Department Official

Back to Top
# C_2005315EN.01001003.xml

| 10.12.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 315/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 315/10

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret, Denmark by order of that court of 5 October 2005 in Anklagemyndigheden v Uwe Kay Festersen

(Case C-370/05)

(2005/C 315/20)

Language of the case: Danish

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Vestre Landsret, Denmark, of 5 October 2005, received at the Court Registry on 10 October 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Anklagemyndigheden and Uwe Kay Festersen on the following questions:

| 1. | Do Article 43 EC and Article 56 EC preclude a Member State from laying down as a condition for acquiring an agricultural property the requirement that the acquirer take up fixed residence on that property? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Do Article 43 EC and Article 56 EC preclude a Member State from laying down as a condition for acquiring an agricultural property the requirement that the acquirer take up fixed residence on that property?

| 2. | Does it matter, as regards the answer to Question 1, that the property cannot constitute a self-sustaining unit and that the property's residential building is situated in an urban zone? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does it matter, as regards the answer to Question 1, that the property cannot constitute a self-sustaining unit and that the property's residential building is situated in an urban zone?

---
Editorial Note on Part 414
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 414 appear at 60 FR 50442, Sept. 29, 1995, and 60 FR 53877, Oct. 18, 1995.

§ 414.63 Payment for outpatient diabetes self-management training. ( a ) Payment under the physician fee schedule. Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, payment for outpatient diabetes self-management training is made under the physician fee schedule in accordance with §§ 414.1 through 414.48.
( b ) To whom payment may be made. Payment may be made to an entity approved by CMS to furnish outpatient diabetes self-management training in accordance with part 410, subpart H of this chapter.
( c ) Limitation on payment. Payment may be made for training sessions actually attended by the beneficiary and documented on attendance sheets.
( d ) Payments made to those not paid under the physician fee schedule. Payments may be made to other entities not routinely paid under the physician fee schedule, such as hospital outpatient departments, ESRD facilities, and DME suppliers. The payment equals the amounts paid under the physician fee schedule.
( e ) Other conditions for fee-for-service payment. The beneficiary must meet the following conditions: ( 1 ) Has not previously received initial training for which Medicare payment was made under this benefit.
( 2 ) Is not receiving services as an inpatient in a hospital, SNF, hospice, or nursing home.
( 3 ) Is not receiving services as an outpatient in an RHC or FQHC.
[65 FR 83153, Dec. 29, 2000]
| Name             | Last modified    | Size |
|------------------|------------------|------|
||
| Parent Directory |             | -    |
| M-137.tif.gz     | 2005-05-27 18:06 | 250M |
||
Homeprivacy policyquestionsUS Department of CommerceNOAANESDISHome
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3065

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to revise the review

of radiopharmaceuticals under section 505 of such Act.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 12, 1996

Mr. COBURN (for himself, Mr. BURR, Mr. STUPAK, and Mrs. LINCOLN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce

A BILL

To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to

revise the review of radiopharmaceuticals under section

505 of such Act.

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 AND REFERENCE.

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as the

5 ‘‘Radiopharmaceutical Review Improvement Act of 1996’’.

6 (b) REFERENCE.—Whenever in this Act an amend7 ment or repeal is expressed in terms of an amendment

8 to a section or other provision, the reference shall be con9 sidered to be made to a section or other provision of the
2

HR 3065 IH

1 Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et

2 seq.)

3 SEC. 2. REVIEW OF RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS.

4 (a) SEC. 505.—Section 505 (21 U.S.C. 355) is

5 amended by adding the following new subsection at the

6 end thereof:

7 ‘‘(n)(1) For purposes of this section, the safety and

8 effectiveness of a radiopharmaceutical are to be deter9 mined—

10 ‘‘(A) weighing the probable benefit to health

11 from the use of the radiopharmaceutical against any

12 probable risk of injury or illness from such use;

13 ‘‘(B) taking into account the absence or pres14 ence of pharmacological and toxicological activity of

15 the radiopharmaceutical and the estimated absorbed

16 dose of the radiopharmaceutical.

17 ‘‘(2) In the case of a radiopharmaceutical intended

18 to be used for diagnostic purposes, the indications for

19 which such a radiopharmaceutical is approved under this

20 section may refer to processes (such as biochemical, phys21 iological, anatomical, or pathological), processes common

22 to or present in one or more disease states, or may refer

23 to a diagnostic procedure used in the diagnosis of one or

24 more diseases.
3

HR 3065 IH

1 ‘‘(3) As used in this subsection and section 503, the

2 term ‘radiopharmaceutical’ means—

3 ‘‘(A) an article that is intended for use in vivo

4 in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or pre5 vention of disease or a manifestation of disease in

6 men, and that exerts its primary effect by the spon7 taneous disintegration of unstable nuclei with the

8 emission of ionizing radiation; or

9 ‘‘(B) a reagent kit or nuclide generator that is

10 intended to be used in the preparation of any such

11 article.’’.

12 (b) SEC. 503.—Section 503(g)(1) (21 U.S.C.

13 353(g)(1)) is amended—

14 (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘or’’;

15 (2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period

16 and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and

17 (3) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the fol18 lowing new subparagraph:

19 ‘‘(D) a radiopharmaceutical, the persons

20 charged with premarket review of the

21 radiopharmaceutical products shall have pri22 mary jurisdiction.’’.

Æ
HomeGhana

# Ghana

111 items

        -    Media Note  		United States and Japan Announce Partnership with Ghana to Support its Goal of Being the Mover in Africa for Small Modular Reactor Deployment	  October 26, 2022 
        -    TIAS  		Ghana (22-928.4) – Arrangement for the Exchange of Technical Information and Cooperation in Nuclear Safety Matters	  September 28, 2022 
        -    Media Note  		Joint Statement on Atlantic Cooperation	  September 20, 2022 
        -    Remarks  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken Remarks at the Strengthening Atlantic Cooperation Ministerial Meeting	  September 20, 2022Palace HotelNew York City, New York 
        -    Foreign Assistance Evaluations: Environment  		Private Investment for Enhanced Resilience (PIER): Final Evaluation Report [PDF]	  August 31, 2022 
        -    Media Note  		Joint Statement on FIRST Program Cooperation at the 2022 NPT Review Conference	  August 25, 2022 
        -    Report  		2022 Investment Climate Statements: Ghana	  July 28, 2022 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – July 19, 2022	  Ned PriceJuly 19, 2022Washington, DC 
        -    Report  		2022 Trafficking in Persons Report: Ghana	  July 19, 2022 
        -    Remarks  		NDI International Summit on Constitutionalism and Democratic Consolidation in Africa	  Uzra ZeyaJuly 6, 2022 

previous page1…34567…12next page

Back to Top
HomeNicaragua

# Nicaragua

139 items

        -    Readout  		Secretary Blinken’s Call with Nicaraguan Foreign Minister Moncada	  February 10, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – February 10, 2023	  Vedant PatelFebruary 10, 2023 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – February 9, 2023	  Ned PriceFebruary 9, 2023WASHINGTON, D.C. 
        -    Press Statement  		Release of Political Prisoners from Nicaragua	  Antony J. BlinkenFebruary 9, 2023 
        -    		Countries of Particular Concern, Special Watch List Countries, Entities of Particular Concern	  November 30, 2022 
        -    Other Release  		IRFBA Chair and Vice Chair’s Statement on Nicaragua	  October 27, 2022 
        -    Department Press Briefing  		Department Press Briefing – October 24, 2022	  Ned PriceOctober 24, 2022Washington, DC 
        -    Press Statement  		Expanding U.S. Sanctions Authorities and Announcement of Visa Restrictions for Nicaraguan Officials	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 24, 2022 
        -    Remarks  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken before the Meeting with Cuban, Venezuelan, and Nicaraguan Human Rights Defenders	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 6, 2022Chief of Mission ResidenceLima, Peru 
        -    Remarks  		Secretary Antony J. Blinken at OAS General Assembly First Plenary Session	  Antony J. BlinkenOctober 6, 2022Lima Convention CenterLima, Peru 

previous page1…34567…14next page

Back to Top
#### Inez FUNDERBURK et al. v. MONTGOMERY ELEVATOR COMPANY et al.

No. 62375.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 8, 1978.

Joint motion of applicants and respondents to dismiss matter pending before the court.

ORDER

The * * * Motion to Dismiss having been considered:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter bearing Docket No. 62,375 on the docket of this Court entitled, “INEZ A. FUNDERBURK, ET AL VS. MONTGOMERY ELEVATOR COMPANY, ET AL”, be dismissed. [See also 359 So.2d 631]
# C_2005330EN.01001305.xml

| 24.12.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 330/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 330/13

---

Removal from the register of Case C-95/05 (1)

1

(2005/C 330/34)

Language of the case: Greek

Language of the case: Greek

By order of 20 September 2005, the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the register of Case C-95/05 Commission of the European Communities v Hellenic Republic.

---

(1)  OJ C 93, 16.4.2005.

1

---
No. 99-503.

#### Herman et al. *v.*Blockbuster Entertainment Group et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### § 587.401 [Reserved]
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Tupou VI, King of Tonga

# 									Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Tupou VI, King of Tonga							

Readout

Office of the Spokesperson

August 5, 2022

The following is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:

Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman met today with Tupou VI, King of Tonga, in Nuku’alofa, Tonga, to celebrate 50 years of bilateral relations between the United States and Tonga.  The Deputy Secretary and King Tupou VI discussed Tonga’s efforts to recover from the Hunga Tonga-Hunga Ha’apai volcanic eruption and tsunami which devastated the nation in January, for which the United States has provided $2.6 million in support.   Deputy Secretary Sherman highlighted the U.S. commitment to enhanced engagement with Tonga, including Vice President Harris’s announcement at the July Pacific Islands Forum that the U.S. will work to open an embassy in Nuku’alofa.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDeputy Secretary of StateOffice of the SpokespersonTonga

Back to Top
§ 82.2 Exceptions. ( a ) The prohibition contained in § 82.1 against the exportation of 5-cent coins and one-cent coins of the United States shall not apply to: ( 1 ) The exportation in any one shipment of 5-cent coins and one-cent coins having an aggregate face value of not more than $100 that are to be legitimately used as money or for numismatic purposes. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to authorize export for the purpose of sale or resale of coins for melting or treatment by any person.
( 2 ) The exportation of 5-cent coins and one-cent coins carried on an individual, or in the personal effects of an individual, departing from a place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, when the aggregate face value is not more than $5, or when the aggregate face value is not more than $25 and it is clear that the purpose for exporting such coins is for legitimate personal numismatic, amusement, or recreational use.
( b ) The prohibition contained in § 82.1 against the treatment of 5-cent coins and one-cent coins shall not apply to the treatment of these coins for educational, amusement, novelty, jewelry, and similar purposes as long as the volumes treated and the nature of the treatment makes it clear that such treatment is not intended as a means by which to profit solely from the value of the metal content of the coins.
( c ) The prohibition contained in § 82.1 against the exportation, melting, or treatment of 5-cent and one-cent coins of the United States shall not apply to coins exported, melted, or treated incidental to the recycling of other materials so long as— ( 1 ) Such 5-cent and one-cent coins were not added to the other materials for their metallurgical value;
( 2 ) The volumes of the 5-cent coins and one-cent coins, relative to the volumes of the other materials recycled, makes it clear that the presence of such coins is merely incidental; and
( 3 ) The separation of the 5-cent and one-cent coins from the other materials would be impracticable or cost prohibitive.
( d ) The prohibition contained in § 82.1 against the exportation, melting, or treatment of 5-cent coins shall not apply to 5-cent coins inscribed with the years 1942, 1943, 1944, or 1945 that are composed of an alloy comprising copper, silver and manganese.
( e ) The prohibition contained in § 82.1 against the exportation of 5-cent coins and one-cent coins shall not apply to 5-cent coins and one-cent coins exported by a Federal Reserve Bank or a domestic depository institution, or to a foreign central bank, when the exportation of such 5-cent coins and one-cent coins is for use as circulating money.
( f ) ( 1 ) The prohibition contained in § 82.1 against exportation, melting, or treatment of 5-cent coins and one-cent coins of the United States shall not apply to coins exported, melted, or treated under a written license issued by the Secretary of the Treasury (or designee).
( 2 ) Applications for licenses should be transmitted to the Director, United States Mint, 801 9th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20220.
No. 00-71.

#### Mead Johnson & Co. *v.*Abbott Laboratories.

C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.

Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Biovest International, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-K),
I, Francis E. ODonnell, Jr., M.D., Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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 Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.

Dated: December 14, 2010



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Francis E. ODonnell, Jr., M.D.              
|Francis E. ODonnell, Jr., M.D.                  
|Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

This certification accompanies the Form 10-K to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of
Biovest International, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained
in such filing.