alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 433.310 Applicability of requirements. ( a ) *General rule.* Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the provisions of this subpart apply to— ( 1 ) Overpayments made to providers that are discovered by the State;
( 2 ) Overpayments made to providers that are initially discovered by the provider and made known to the State agency; and
( 3 ) Overpayments that are discovered through Federal reviews.
( b ) *Third party payments and probate collections.* The requirements of this subpart do not apply to— ( 1 ) Cases involving third party liability because, in these situations, recovery is sought for a Medicaid payment that would have been made had another party not been legally responsible for payment; and
( 2 ) Probate collections from the estates of deceased Medicaid beneficiaries, as they represent the recovery of payments properly made from resources later determined to be available to the State.
( c ) *Unallowable costs paid under rate-setting systems.* ( 1 ) Unallowable costs for a prior year paid to an institutional provider under a rate-setting system that a State recovers through an adjustment to the per diem rate for a subsequent period do not constitute overpayments that are subject to the requirements of this subpart. In such cases, the State is not required to refund the Federal share explicitly related to the original overpayment in accordance with the regulations in this subpart. Refund of the Federal share occurs when the State claims future expenditures made to the provider at a reduced rate.
( 2 ) Unallowable costs for a prior year paid to an institutional provider under a rate-setting system that a State seeks to recover in a lump sum, by an installment repayment plan, or through reduction of future payments to which the provider would otherwise be entitled constitute overpayments that are subject to the requirements of this subpart.
( d ) *Recapture of depreciation upon gain on the sale of assets.* Depreciation payments are considered overpayments for purposes of this subpart if a State requires their recapture in a discrete amount(s) upon gain on the sale of assets.
HomeFY16 Report on Conferences as Required by Office of Management and Budget Memorandum M-12-12 and M-17-08

# 									FY16 Report on Conferences as Required by Office of Management and Budget Memorandum M-12-12 and M-17-08							

Report

January 6, 2017

						Download Report												[617 KB]

This report fulfils the U.S. Department of State’s reporting requirements pertaining to conference related expenditures contained within the Office of Management and Budget’s Memorandum M-12-12 (OMB M-12-12, issued May, 2012, and OMB M-17-08, issued November 25, 2016) for fiscal year 2016.

Tags

Budget Report

Back to Top
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCanonical Signed Digit StudyFinite Impulse Response digital filter using Canonical Signed-Digit (CSD) number representation for the coefficients has been studied and its computer simulation results are presented here. Minimum Mean Square Error (MMSE) criterion is employed to optimize filter coefficients into the corresponding CSD numbers. To further improve coefficients optimization process, an extra non-zero bit is added for any filter coefficients exceeding 1/2. This technique improves frequency response of filter without increasing filter complexity almost at all. The simulation results show outstanding performance in bit-error-rate (BER) curve for all CSD implemented digital filters included in this presentation material.Document ID19970002920Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsKim, Heechul*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland,OH United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateOctober 1, 1996Subject CategoryCommunications And RadarReport/Patent NumberE-10466NASA-TM-107335NAS 1.15:107335Accession Number97N11709Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 233-5A-5GDistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19970002920.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
#### § 423.1002 Definitions.

As used in this subpart—

*Affected party* means any Part D sponsor or manufacturer (as defined in § 423.2305) impacted by an initial determination or, if applicable, by a subsequent determination or decision issued under this part, and “party” means the affected party or CMS, as appropriate.

*ALJ* stands for Administrative Law Judge.

*Departmental Appeals Board or Board* means a Board established in the Office of the Secretary to provide impartial review of disputed decisions made by the operating components of the Department.

*Part D sponsor* has the meaning given the term in 423.4.

[72 FR 68736, Dec. 5, 2007, as amended 77 FR 22171, Apr. 12, 2012]
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 21

- 00049

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.R.F. and S.W.F., Children

From the 408th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019PA00061

Honorable Mary Lou Alvarez , Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ

, JUSTICE RIOS , AND JUSTICE VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, Father’s appeal is DISMISSED AS

MOOT , and the judgment is AFFIRMED

. Costs are taxed against appellants. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P.

43.4.

SIGNED August 25, 2021.

_____________________________ Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Department of State Participation in Taiwan-hosted Event on Open Government and Anti-Corruption

# 									Department of State Participation in Taiwan-hosted Event on Open Government and Anti-Corruption							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

May 20, 2021

As a member of the Open Government Partnership (OGP), the United States supports greater transparency and civic participation in public affairs. To highlight Open Government Week 2021, today Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Scott Busby of the Department of State’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor joined the OGP, Transparency International, and Taiwanese Digital Minister Audrey Tang in a panel discussion on Taiwan’s efforts to advance open governance solutions to public policy challenges and support anticorruption efforts globally. The panel discussed how technology can build freer and more open societies; emphasized the role of technology in supporting information transparency, deepening public-private collaboration, and strengthening civil society; how the COVID pandemic impacted transparency efforts; and how media efforts investigate and raise awareness of corruption. The event highlighted Taiwan’s contribution to the Global Anti-Corruption Consortium (GACC), which supports investigative journalism’s role in documenting corruption. Watch the recorded event.

Tags

Anti-Corruption and TransparencyBureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsOffice of the SpokespersonScienceTaiwan

Back to Top
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>         5
<MULTIPLIER>      1
       
<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           JAN-3-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                JAN-3-1998
<CASH>                                        2,414,725
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 3,091,287
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                   4,508,569
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             11,107,284
<PP&E>                                       13,856,825
<DEPRECIATION>                                9,663,081
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               15,559,804
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         2,381,273
<BONDS>                                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                      1,325,566
<OTHER-SE>                                   11,477,265
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 15,559,804
<SALES>                                      18,659,106
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             18,659,106
<CGS>                                         6,716,187
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 6,716,187
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               2,157,409
<INCOME-TAX>                                    755,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                   0
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                  1,402,409
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       .91
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       .87
        

</TABLE>
§ 433.312 Basic requirements for refunds. ( a ) *Basic rules.* ( 1 ) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the State Medicaid agency has 1 year from the date of discovery of an overpayment to a provider to recover or seek to recover the overpayment before the Federal share must be refunded to CMS.
( 2 ) The State Medicaid agency must refund the Federal share of overpayments at the end of the 1-year period following discovery in accordance with the requirements of this subpart, whether or not the State has recovered the overpayment from the provider.
( b ) *Exception.* The agency is not required to refund the Federal share of an overpayment made to a provider when the State is unable to recover the overpayment amount because the provider has been determined bankrupt or out of business in accordance with § 433.318.
( c ) *Applicability.* ( 1 ) The requirements of this subpart apply to overpayments made to Medicaid providers that occur and are discovered in any quarter that begins on or after October 1, 1985.
( 2 ) The date upon which an overpayment occurs is the date upon which a State, using its normal method of reimbursement for a particular class of provider (e.g., check, interfund transfer), makes the payment involving unallowable costs to a provider.
[54 FR 5460, Feb. 3, 1989, as amended at 77 FR 31511, May 29, 2012]
# Annex II

Reporting accounting framework for critical uses of methyl bromide (all quantities expressed in metric tons) 

# Party: 

# United States of America

E F H J K L M (C + D) (B - E) (E + G) (E-I-J-K) Amount exported Amount

destroyed Amount of pre-2005 on hand at end of year 

### Amount Country



## 2012 760 655 104 Israel 759 1 1,249 2,008 759 0 0 0 627

a
b 

### A B C
Amount of CUE on hand at end of year Total quantity acquired for critical use Quantity

authorized but not acquired Amount of

pre-2005 on hand at start of year Amount

available for use Year of critical use Quantity

exempted for year of critical
use a

In addition to the amount in column I, there was an additional 237 MT from stocks accessed in 2012 for critical uses via critical stock allowances. 

### G I

Amount used for critical
use b Quantity acquired by production for critical use Quantity acquired for

critical use by import & country of manufacture 

### D

Total 2012 authorization by the Parties was 1,023 MT. Total U.S. allocation for new production and import for 2012 critical uses was 760 MT; additional amounts of stocks were allowable for 2012 critical uses in the amount of 263 MT as critical stock allowances.
# C_2006060EN.01003002.xml

| 11.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 60/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 60/30

---

Action brought on 24 January 2006 by Commission of the European Communities against the Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-39/06)

(2006/C 60/58)

Language of the case: German

An action against the Federal Republic of Germany was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 24 January 2006 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by K. Gross and T. Scharf, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that by not taking all the measures necessary to recover the aid granted, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 249 EC and Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Commission Decision in the State aid procedure C-62/00 (ex NN 142/99) of 30 October 2002, in the form of the corrected decision of 13 May 2003 (2003/643/EC) (1) on the State aid implemented by Germany for Kahla Porzellan GmbH and Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that by not taking all the measures necessary to recover the aid granted, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 249 EC and Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Commission Decision in the State aid procedure C-62/00 (ex NN 142/99) of 30 October 2002, in the form of the corrected decision of 13 May 2003 (2003/643/EC) (1) on the State aid implemented by Germany for Kahla Porzellan GmbH and Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH;

1

| 2. | order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

According to the European Commission, the Federal Government failed to sufficiently implement the Commission's decision in the State aid procedure C-62/00 (ex NN 142/99) of 30 October 2002 in the form of the corrected decision of 13 May 2003 (2003/643/EC).

By means of the decision, a number of items of State aid granted by Germany to Kahla Porzellan GmbH in the years from 1991 to 1993 and to Kahla/Thüringen Porzellan GmbH in the years from 1993 to 1999 were declared to be incompatible with the common market. At the same time the decision ordered that they be recovered, including interest.

The fact that Decision 2003/643/EC is being contested in Case T-20/03 is irrelevant as regards the obligation to execute the decision, as the bringing of the action has no suspensory effect.

As the Federal Republic has not yet fully implemented Decision 2003/643/EC, despite repeated written demands on the part of the Commission, the Commission has brought an action under the second paragraph of Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty.

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 227, p. 12.

1

---
§ 435.920 Verification of SSNs. ( a ) In redetermining eligibility, the agency must review case records to determine whether they contain the beneficiary's SSN or, in the case of families, each family member's SSN.
( b ) If the case record does not contain the required SSNs, the agency must require the beneficiary to furnish them and meet other requirements of § 435.910.
( c ) For any beneficiary whose SSN was established as part of the case record without evidence required under the SSA regulations as to age, citizenship, alien status, or true identity, the agency must obtain verification of these factors in accordance with § 435.910.
[44 FR 17937, Mar. 23, 1979, as amended at 51 FR 7211, Feb. 28, 1986]
# C_2006129EN.01000101.xml

| 2.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/1

---

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):

1

2,58 % on 1 June 2006

Euro exchange rates (2)

2

1 June 2006

(2006/C 129/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2736 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 144,19 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4582 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,6847 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2655 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5628 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 92,34 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,7835 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,575 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 28,254 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 263,2 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,696 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9383 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 3,5293 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,64 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 37,8 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9915 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,7081 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4099 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,8803 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,0205 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,02 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 206,42 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 8,6172 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,2155 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,256 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 895,42 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6359 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 67,348 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 34,505 |
| THB | Thai baht | 48,711 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2736

JPY

Japanese yen

144,19

DKK

Danish krone

7,4582

GBP

Pound sterling

0,6847

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2655

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5628

ISK

Iceland króna

92,34

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,7835

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,575

CZK

Czech koruna

28,254

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

263,2

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,696

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9383

RON

Romanian leu

3,5293

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,64

SKK

Slovak koruna

37,8

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9915

AUD

Australian dollar

1,7081

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4099

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,8803

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,0205

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,02

KRW

South Korean won

1 206,42

ZAR

South African rand

8,6172

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,2155

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,256

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 895,42

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6359

PHP

Philippine peso

67,348

RUB

Russian rouble

34,505

THB

Thai baht

48,711

---

(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

1

(2)

2

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
#### Richard H. SCHWEITZER, III, et al., Petitioners, v. The CITY OF ST. PETERSBURG, Florida, a Municipal Corporation et al., Respondents.

No. 45797.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 23, 1975.

Certiorari denied. 297 So.2d 74.

ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.

DEKLE, J., dissents.
EXHIBIT
      32.2





STATEMENT
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 BY PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE
      OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER





I,
      O'Donnell Iselin II, herby certify, to my knowledge, that:





1.
      the
      accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Cadiz Inc. for the period ended
      March 31, 2007 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934,
      as
      amended; and





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





IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Statement as of the date
      first written above.





Dated:
      May 10, 2007





/s/
      O'Donnell Iselin II


O'Donnell
      Iselin II


Chief
      Financial Officer and Secretary
# C_2005229EN.01002202.xml

| 17.9.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 229/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 229/22

---

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

ORDER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

of 15 June 2005

in Case T-98/04 Nuova Agricast Srl and Others v Commission of the European Communities (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Admissibility - Time-limits - Point when time starts to run - Publication - Internet site)

(2005/C 229/48)

Language of the case: Italian

In Case T-98/04: Nuova Agricast Srl, established in Cerignola (Italy), Società imballaggi metallici Salerno Srl (SIMSA), established in Portici (Italy), Poli Sud Srl, established in Lamezia Terme (Italy), Tomasetto Achille Sas di Tomasetto Andrea & C., established in Castegnero (Italy), Nuova fabbrica utensili diamantati Srl (Nuova Faudi), established in Marcellina (Italy), Cofra Srl, established in Barletta (Italy), Lavorazione cuoio e pelli Bieffe Srl, established in San Miniato (Italy), represented by M. Calabrese, lawyer, against Commission of the European Communities (agent: V. Di Bucci, with an address for service in Luxembourg) — application for annulment of the Commission's decision of 12 July 2000 declaring compatible with the common market a scheme for aid for investment in the less-favoured regions of Italy (State Aid N 715/99 –Italy (SG (2000) D/105754) — the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber), composed of M. Vilaras, President, F. Dehousse and D. Sváby, Judges; H. Jung, Registrar, made an order on 8 June 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible; |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible;

| 2. | The applicants are ordered to bear their own costs and to pay those of the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicants are ordered to bear their own costs and to pay those of the Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 106 of 30.4.2004.

1

---
#### STATE of Louisiana v. William M. PEDDRICK.

No. 62728.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 5, 1979.

*698N. Graves Thomas, Shreveport, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Paul J. Car-mouche, Dist. Atty., B. Woodrow Nesbitt, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.*

The defendant William M. Peddrick was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, La.R.S. 40:967 and sentenced to thirteen years imprisonment at hard labor. Of the twelve assignments of error filed in the trial court, two were briefed and considered in this appeal.

The assignments do not present reversible error and are governed by clearly applicable legal principles. The assignments require lengthy factual discussion of interest primarily to the parties, but not involving circumstances likely to recur. We have therefore discussed and disposed of them in an appendix attached to this opinion, which remains a public record of this Court but which is not for publication.

Accordingly, we affirm the conviction and sentence.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Judge Pike Hall, Jr., Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, participated in this decision as an Associate Justice Ad Hoc.
§ 417.530 Basis and scope. This subpart sets forth the principles that CMS follows to determine the amount it pays for services furnished by a cost HMO or CMP to its Medicare enrollees. These principles are based on sections 1861(v) and 1876 of the Act and are, for the most part, the same as those set forth— ( a ) In part 412 of this chapter, for paying the costs of inpatient hospital services which, for cost HMOs and CMPs, are considered “reasonable” only if they do not exceed the amounts allowed under the prospective payment system; and
( b ) In part 413 of this chapter, for the costs of all other covered services.
[60 FR 46230, Sept. 6, 1995]