alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Philippine President-Elect Marcos, Jr.

# 									Deputy Secretary Sherman’s Meeting with Philippine President-Elect Marcos, Jr.							

Readout

Office of the Spokesperson

June 9, 2022

The below is attributable to Spokesperson Ned Price:

Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman met today with Philippine President-Elect Ferdinand Romualdez Marcos Jr., and his advisors, including Philippine Ambassador to the United States Jose Manuel Romualdez, incoming Executive Secretary Vic Rodriguez, and Department of Foreign Affairs Under Secretary Theresa Lazaro, in Manila, the Philippines. Deputy Secretary Sherman congratulated President-Elect Marcos on his election. The President-elect and Deputy Secretary agreed on the importance of partnering together to strengthen our economies, including the importance of public-private partnerships, clean energy and our digital economy. The Deputy Secretary and the President-Elect highlighted the importance of the U.S.-Philippine Alliance to security and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region and the world and the importance of fostering respect for human rights and rule of law in the Philippines. They discussed opportunities for our two nations to deepen our Alliance and friendship and seize new opportunities to deliver for our people in the years to come.

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDeputy Secretary TripDeputy Secretary of StateEconomic AffairsElectionsEnergyHuman RightsOffice of the SpokespersonPhilippinesRule of Law

Back to Top
# C_2005182EN.01003403.xml

| 23.7.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.7.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/34

---

Removal from the register of Case C-457/04 (1)

1

(2005/C 182/63)

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

(Language of the case: Portuguese)

By order of 7 April 2005, the President of the Court of Justice of the European Communities has ordered the removal from the register of Case C-457/04 Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic.

---

(1)  OJ C 6 of 08.01.2005.

1

---
v^ 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 

(DEIIW 

Aero Ways, Inc., 

Complainant 

Delaware River & Bay 

Authority, 

Respondent 

L 

FEB 1 6 2010 

PART 16 OCXJKETS 

FAA Docket No.16-09-12 

COMPLAINANT AERO WAYS. INC.^S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF 

TIME TO RESPOND TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS 

1. Complainant Aero Ways, Inc. moves, pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 

16.11, for an extension of time to respond to Respondent's Motion 

to Dismiss. This request is unopposed by the Respondent, Delaware 

River and Bay Authority. 

2. Aero Ways, Inc. Respectfully requests an addition extension 

of the deadline for filing its response to the Motion to Dismiss of 

42 days, until March 31st. 

3. On February 15, 2010, Counsel for Complainant, Joseph 

Michael Lamoncaca, contacted Counsel for Respondent, Leslie A. 

Polozoti, to request Respondent's consent to this motion, and 

Counsel for Respondent indicated that Respondent has no objection 

to this extension. 

4 . This extension is necessary and appropriate for a fair and 

complete hearing of matters before the agency. A review of 

Respondent's Motion to Dismiss and exhibits demonstrates that it 

will take a substantial amount of time to analyze and respond to 
the Motion to Dismiss. Consequently, responding to the Motion will 

take a longer time than the remaining days permitted by rule. 

5. Aero Ways, Inc. therefore respectfully requests that the 

FAA extend its time to file a response to Respondent's Motion to 

Dismiss until March 31, 2010. 

Respectfully submitted: 

JosegJ^Michael^-iramonaca 

il for Aero Ways, Inc, 

Jew Castle County Airport 

PO Box 10583 

Wilmington, DE 19850-0583 

(610) 558-3376 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on this 16^^ day of February, 2010, 

served the foregoing Motion for Extension of Time on the following 

persons at the following addresses by: 

Federal Express: 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

FAA Part 16 Airport Proceedings Docket, AGC-610 

Room 925 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

R. Judson Scaggs, Jr. 

Leslie A. Polozoti 

Pauletta J. Brown 

Morris, Nichols, Arsht and Tunnell, LLP 

1201 Market Street, 18th Floor 

P.O. Box 1347 

Wilmington, DE 19899-1347 

ch^?Lamonac a 

for Aero Ways, Inc.
EXHIBIT
18





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 Annual Report of Utah Medical Products, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Paul O.
Richins, Principal Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:





(1)
            the
      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 result of operations of the
      Company.











/s/ Paul O.
Richins


Paul O.
Richins


Principal
Financial Officer


March 8,
2010








A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.








---
HomeDREAMS Partnership...DREAMS Country Fact Sheets

# 									DREAMS Country Fact Sheets							

The United States President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief

June 27, 2020

##### DREAMS Country Fact Sheets

Fact sheets are in PDF format.
        - Botswana [622 KB]
        - Cote d’Ivoire [606 KB]
        - Eswatini [712 KB]
        - Haiti [635 KB]
        - Kenya [672 KB]
        - Lesotho [492 KB]
        - Malawi [638 KB]
        - Mozambique [679 KB]
        - Namibia [643 KB]
        - Rwanda [655 KB]
        - South Africa [697 KB]
        - Tanzania [683 KB]
        - Uganda [720 KB]
        - Zambia [651 KB]
        - Zimbabwe [681 KB]

Back to Top
# C_2006014EN.01002301.xml

| 19.1.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 14/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 14/23

---

Amendment to the notice of invitation to tender for the refund for the export of common wheat to certain third countries

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 166 of 7 July 2005
  )

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 166 of 7 July 2005

(2006/C 14/11)

Page 54, the text of point 2, under heading I ‘Subject’, reads as follows:

‘The total quantity in respect of which there may be fixed a maximum export refund as provided in Article 4(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 (1), is approximately 6 000 000 tonnes.’.

---

(1)  OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 20 (Monday, February 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5872-5873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-2180]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the 
ACRS Subcommittee on US-APWR; Notice of Meeting

    The ACRS Subcommittee on the US-APWR (U.S. Advanced Pressurized 
Water Reactor) will hold a meeting on February 19, 2009, in a 
conference room at Mitsubishi Electric Power Products, Inc., 547 
Keystone Drive, Suite 200, Warrendale, PA 15088. Note that the street 
address for members of the public to check in and receive a badge is 
530 Keystone Drive, Warrendale, PA 15088.
    The morning sessions of this meeting will be open to public 
attendance.

[[Page 5873]]

Sessions after approximately 10:30 a.m. may be closed to protect 
information that is proprietary to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. 
and its contractors pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).
    The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Thursday, 
February 19, 2009--8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.
    The Subcommittee will review three topical reports associated with: 
Large-Break LOCA (loss-of-coolant-accident) Code Applicability Report 
for US-APWR; Small-Break LOCA Methodology for US-APWR; and Non-LOCA 
Methodology. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold 
discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, Mitsubishi Heavy 
Industries, Ltd., and other interested persons regarding this matter. 
The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and 
facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, 
for deliberation by the Full Committee.
    Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or 
written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. 
Neil Coleman, (Telephone: 301-415-7656) five days prior to the meeting, 
if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic 
recordings will be permitted. Detailed procedures for the conduct of 
and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal 
Register on October 6, 2008 (73 FR 58268-58269).
    Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by 
contacting the Designated Federal Official between 8 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. 
(ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the 
above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting 
to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda.

     Dated: January 26, 2009.
Antonio Dias,
Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, Advisory Committee on Reactor 
Safeguards.
 [FR Doc. E9-2180 Filed 1-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
#### § 37.94 Respiratory assessment form.

As part of the spirometry testing and concurrent with it, personnel at the facility must complete a Respiratory Assessment Form (CDC/NIOSH 2.13).

[81 FR 73287, Oct. 24, 2016]
##### 



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 First Equity Properties, Inc. (the
Company), on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with
Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ken L.
Joines, Vice President, Secretary and Chief Accounting 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. Date: August 19, 2004
    /s/ Ken L. JoinesKen L. JoinesVice President, Secretary and Chief
Accounting Officer
No. 99-1880.

#### Freeman et al. *v.*Burlington Broadcasters, Inc., dba WIZN, et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of James Jeffords et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae*granted. Certiorari denied.
EPA REGISTRATION NUMBER 72642-912345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152 *Inert ingredient information may be entitled to confidential treatment*5354 *Inert ingredient information may be entitled to confidential treatment*55 *Inert ingredient information may be entitled to confidential treatment*56 *Inert ingredient information may be entitled to confidential treatment*57 *Inert ingredient information may be entitled to confidential treatment*5859 *Inert ingredient information may be entitled to confidential treatment*60616263646566676869707172 *Commercial/financial information m ay be entitled to confidential treatment*737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125 *Inert ingredient information may be entitled to confidential treatment*126
Exhibit 32.1

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

I, David B. Lee, of Omega Financial Corporation, certify, pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

      1.    The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period
            ended December 31, 2003 ("the Report") fully complies with the
            requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
            (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

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

            /s/ David B. Lee
            --------------------------------
            Chief Executive Officer                       Date: 03/12/2004

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

I, Daniel L. Warfel, of Omega Financial Corporation, certify, pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

      1.    The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period
            ended December 31, 2003 ("the Report") fully complies with the
            requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
            (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

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

            /s/ Daniel L. Warfel
            --------------------------------
            Chief Financial Officer                       Date:  03/12/2004
```

[110th Congress Public Law 335]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ335.110]

[[Page 122 STAT. 3724]]

Public Law 110-335
110th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To amend title 11, District of Columbia Official Code, to implement the 
  increase provided under the District of Columbia Appropriations Act, 
  2008, in the amount of funds made available for the compensation of 
 attorneys representing indigent defendants in the District of Columbia 
 courts, and for other purposes. <<NOTE: Oct. 2, 2008 -  [H.R. 5551]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. IMPLEMENTATION OF INCREASE PROVIDED IN FUNDING FOR 
                              COMPENSATION OF ATTORNEYS 
                              REPRESENTING INDIGENT DEFENDANTS IN 
                              DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURTS.

    (a) Increase in Hourly Rate.--Section 11-2604(a), District of 
Columbia Official Code, is amended by striking ``$65 per hour'' and 
inserting ``$80 per hour''.
    (b) Increase in Caps on Total Compensation Paid for Particular 
Cases.--Section 11-2604(b), District of Columbia Official Code, is 
amended to read as follows:
    ``(b) The compensation to be paid to an attorney appointed pursuant 
to this chapter shall not exceed the following maximum amounts:
            ``(1) For representation of a defendant before the Superior 
        Court of the District of Columbia for misdemeanors or felonies, 
        the maximum amount set forth in section 3006A(d)(2) of title 18, 
        United States Code, for representation of a defendant before the 
        United States magistrate judge or the district court for 
        misdemeanors or felonies (as the case may be).
            ``(2) For representation of a defendant before the District 
        of Columbia Court of Appeals, the maximum amount set forth in 
        section 3006A(d)(2) of title 18, United States Code, for 
        representation of a defendant in an appellate court.
            ``(3) For representation of a defendant in post-trial 
        matters for misdemeanors or felonies, the amount applicable 
        under paragraph (1) for misdemeanors or felonies (as the case 
        may be).''.

[[Page 122 STAT. 3725]]

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to cases 
and proceedings initiated on or after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.

    Approved October 2, 2008.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5551:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 110-560 (Comm. on Oversight and Government Reform).
SENATE REPORTS: No. 110-432 (Comm. on Homeland Security and Governmental 
Affairs).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 154 (2008):
            Apr. 1, considered and passed House.
            Sept. 16, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### Guillermo LOPEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 74-421.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 31, 1974.

*269Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender and Kurt Marmar, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Joel Rosenblatt, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before PEARSON, HAVERFIELD and NATHAN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was found guilty of grand larceny after a trial before the court without jury. On this appeal from the judgment and sentence, he argues that the evidence was insufficient because the corpus delicti was not proved prior to the admission of his confession. We hold that the proof was sufficient under the holding in Rowe v. State, Fla.1956, 84 So.2d 709.

Appellant’s point claiming that the information was insufficient to invoke the felony jurisdiction of the trial court does not present reversible error. No motion to dismiss the information or for a statement of particulars was made and the information was sufficient to inform the defendant of the crime with which he was charged. The proof conformed to that required by the statute. We hold that the information was sufficient. See Valassakis v. State, Fla.App.1966, 187 So.2d 74; Thomas v. State, Fla.App.1968, 216 So.2d 780.

However, we find the sentence here to be improper. See Williams v. State, Fla.App.1973, 280 So.2d 518; Harris v. State, Fla.App.1974, 288 So.2d 552; Kohn v. State, Fla.App.1974, 289 So.2d 48. In accordance with the procedure set out in our opinion on rehearing in the case of Durham v. State, Fla.App.1974, 304 So.2d 146, (1974, opinion on rehearing as yet unreported) we remand the case to the trial court for resentencing. We believe, as we did in Durham, that the trial judge is in the best position to evaluate the circumstances of the case and, thereby, to impose the most equitable sentence based on the evidence and various records and documents before him.

It is so ordered.
#### QUALITY TRANSPORT, INC. v. YOUNGER BROTHERS, INC., et al. Steven BROWN v. YOUNGER BROTHERS, INC., et al. TEXAS GENERAL INDEMNITY CO. v. YOUNGER BROTHERS, INC., et al.

No. 65017.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 4, 1979.

In re Quality Transport, Inc., and Texas General Indemnity Company, applying for *659certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge. 372 So.2d 630.

Writ denied.

DIXON, J., would grant the writ.
#### Peter E. SWINSCOE and Chloe M. Swinscoe, his wife, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellee.

No. 75-483.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 3, 1975.

*12Gaylord A. Wood, Jr., of Wood & Cohen, Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Stephen E. Mitchell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.

CROSS, Judge.

Appellants, Peter E. Swinscoe and Chloe M. Swinscoe, his wife, take an interlocutory appeal from an order entered by the trial court transferring venue to Leon County. We reverse.

Appellants, Peter E. Swinscoe and Chloe M. Swinscoe, his wife, sued appellee, Department of Revenue, in Broward County seeking to enjoin appellee from collecting certain documentary stamp taxes. The Department of Revenue filed a motion seeking a change of venue to Leon County where it “resides” and maintains its official headquarters. The trial court entered an order transferring the cause to Leon County. It is from this order that appellants take this interlocutory appeal.

The sole question presented for our determination on this appeal is whether the trial court erred transferring this action to Leon County.

Absent a waiver, a state agency may be sued in a county other than the si-tus of its official headquarters only when the official action complained of has, in fact, been or is being performed in the county wherein the suit is filed or when the threat of such action in said county is both real and imminent. *Department of Revenue v. Arvida Corporation,*315 So.2d 235, Opinion filed July 2, 1975, Second District Court of Appeal Case; *Department of Revenue v. First Federal Savings & Loan Association,*256 So.2d 524 (Fla.App.1971).

Turning to the instant case, appellants were informed on August 28, 1974, by written notice from the ■ Department of Revenue that a tax warrant and execution had been issued. Additionally, the notice further stated that “the tax warrant and execution are being delivered to [the] area supervisor . . . and he is instructed to withhold delivery of these documents to the Clerk of the Circuit Court and Sheriff until September 6, 1974. This extension of time is provided in the event you wish to make a voluntary payment to the area supervisor before he delivers the documents for execution.” The tax not having been paid by appellants, the tax warrant was recorded on December 13, 1974 in the official records of Broward County.

It is our opinion that the official action taken by the Department of Revenue in this case was of such a nature as to require that appellants be allowed to bring suit in Broward County against the Department of Revenue. The trial court, therefore, erred in transferring this action to Leon County.

Accordingly, the order of the trial court herein appealed is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the views herein expressed.

WALDEN, C. J., and DOWNEY, J., concur.
Editorial Note on Part 409
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 409 appear at 62 FR 46037, Aug. 29, 1997.

§ 409.47 Place of service requirements. To be covered, home health services must be furnished in either the beneficiary's home or an outpatient setting as defined in this section. ( a ) *Beneficiary's home.* A beneficiary's home is any place in which a beneficiary resides that is not a hospital, SNF, or nursing facility as defined in sections 1861(e)(1), 1819(a)(1), of 1919(a)(1) of the Act, respectively.
( b ) *Outpatient setting.* For purposes of coverage of home health services, an outpatient setting may include a hospital, SNF or a rehabilitation center with which the HHA has an arrangement in accordance with the requirements of § 484.105(e) of this chapter and that is used by the HHA to provide services that either— ( 1 ) Require equipment that cannot be made available at the beneficiary's home; or
( 2 ) Are furnished while the beneficiary is at the facility to receive services requiring equipment described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
[59 FR 65496, Dec. 20, 1994, as amended at 82 FR 4578, Jan. 13, 2017]