alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Order entered March 12, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-17-00577-CV

NIXDORF GMBH & CO. KG AND WATERCREST PARTNERS, L.P., Appellants

V.

TRA MIDLAND PROPERTIES, LLC, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the 191st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-17-06190

ORDER

Before the Court is appellees’ March 7, 2018 unopposed third motion for extension of 

time to file appellees’ brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER appellees’ brief filed on or 

before MARCH 14, 2018. We caution appellees that further extension requests will be 

disfavored. 

/s/ DAVID EVANS 

JUSTICE
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Martha L. Long, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this annual report on

Form 10-KSB/A No. 1

 of National Property Investors 6;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;



3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:



(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;



(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  

February 22, 2008

/s/Martha L. Long

Martha L. Long

Senior Vice President of NPI Equity Investments, Inc., equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership
# ***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 Auto Underwriters of America, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the “Report), Dean Antonis, as Principal Executive Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:

| (1)    | the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                         |
|-----------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                       |                                                                                                                             |
| (2)    | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |

/s/ DeanAntonis                                    Dean AntonisPresident and Principal Executive OfficerDate:  July 15, 2005This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
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.

§ 414.1700 Basis of payment. ( a ) *General rule.* For home intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) items or services furnished on or after January 1, 2024, Medicare payment is made on the basis of 80 percent of the lesser of the following: ( 1 ) The actual charge for the item or service.
( 2 ) The fee schedule amount for the items and services, as determined in accordance with the provisions of this section.
( b ) *Per visit amount.* A single payment amount is made for items and services furnished by a DME supplier per visit.
( c ) *Initial establishment of the payment amount.* In establishing the initial per visit IVIG items and services payment amount for CY 2024, CMS used the CY 2023 bundled payment rate under the IVIG Demonstration updated by the home health payment percentage update for CY 2024.
( d ) *Annual payment adjustment.* The per visit payment amount represents payment in full for all costs associated with the furnishing of home IVIG items and services and is subject to the following adjustment: ( 1 ) Beginning in 2025, an annual increase in the per-visit payment amount from the prior year by the home health update percentage increase for the current calendar year.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices 

# Order

January 27, 2016

151417

RENEE B

. LAFAVE, SHIRLEY ZIMMER,

RONALD PROCTOR, and JOANN M.

PROCTOR,

Plaintiffs/Counter

- Defendants

- Appellees,

and

LAWRENCE R. MCCALEB,

Plaintiff,

v SC: 151417

COA: 315439

Ionia CC: 2010

- 027799

- CH

IONIA COUNTY ROAD COMMISSION

CHAIRPERSON, JOHN BUSH, STATE

TREASURER, CHARLES LLOYD BABCOCK,

DAWN KONENSKI, ROGER KONENSKI,

LEON PLATTE TRUST, ALICIA BETZ,

MEDFORD BAILEY, ROBERT ZIMMER,

TRACY ANTHONY, DANIEL R. ZIMMER,

JODIE L. ZIMMER, DAWN ALDRICH,

PATRICIA LIPPINCOTT TRUST, JOHANNA

PARSHALL, MICHELLE DROSTE, EUGENE

DROSTE, DIRECTOR OF DEPARTMENT OF

NATURAL RESOURCES, CONSUMERS

ENERGY CO., AT&T, HOMEWORKS

TRI

- COUNTY ELECTRIC CO

- O P, TOWNSHIP

OF LYONS, IONIA COUNTY ROAD

COMMISSION, and DIRECTOR OF

DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND

REGULATORY AFFAIRS

Defendants,

and

SALLY N. COOK,

Defendant/Counter

- Plaintiff,

and

MOLLY E. KANDLE

- KOST and JAMES KOST,

Defendants/Counter

- Plaintiffs

- Appellants

. ___________________________________________/I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 27, 2016

a0120 2

Clerk On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 27, 2015

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.305(H)(1), in

lieu of granting leave to appeal, we VACATE that part of the Court of Appeals opinion

applying the law of abandonment to the facts of this case. The Court of Appeals erred by

finding that the facts on rec ord are sufficient to demonstrate defendants Molly Kandle

Kost and James Kost intended to abandon their easement rights in Weberta Drive,

particularly in light of the failure of the trial court to make any findings on abandonment

or the precise nature of d efendants’ property right. We therefore REMAND this case to

the Ionia Circuit Court for findings on the nature of any property right retained by

defendants Molly Kandle

- Kost and James Kost in Weberta Drive. Once that court has

determined the nature of th at right, it should determine whether an abandonment analysis

is applicable and, if it is applicable, make any necessary findings regarding whether

defendants intended to abandon their property rights in Weberta Drive. See Dep’t of

Natura l Resources v Car mody

- Lahti Real Estate, Inc , 472 Mich 359, 385 (2005). In all

other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the

remaining question presented should be reviewed by this Court.

We do not retain jurisdiction.
Home2021 Certificates of Competency for Nominees to be Chiefs of Mission...Haas, Peter D. – People’s Republic of Bangladesh – July 2021

# 									Haas, Peter D. – People’s Republic of Bangladesh – July 2021							

Certificate of Competency

July 15, 2021

REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

UNITED STATES SENATE

SUBJECT:            Ambassadorial Nomination:  Certificate of Demonstrated Competence — Foreign Service Act, Section 304(a)(4)

POST:                  People’s Republic of Bangladesh

CANDIDATE:     Peter D. Haas

Peter Haas, a career member of the Senior Foreign Service, class of Minister-Counselor, currently serves as Acting Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs, U.S. Department of State, Washington, D.C.  He concurrently holds the position of Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary in the same Bureau. Previously, Mr. Haas was Senior Advisor/Deputy Assistant Secretary for Trade Policy and Negotiations for the State Department and prior to that was the Deputy Permanent Representative to the U.S. Mission to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, France. Over his career he has served in positions across five geographic bureaus of the State Department including as Consul General of the U.S. Consulate General Mumbai, India. His demonstrated success in key leadership positions coupled with three decades of substantive experience as a policymaker and diplomatic practitioner makes him a well-qualified candidate to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Bangladesh.

Among his other assignments, Mr. Hass has served as the Economic Counselor at the U.S. Embassy Jakarta and as an Economic Officer at the U.S. Embassy, London, and the U.S. Embassy Rabat. Other assignments include positions as Economic Officer in the Office of East European Assistance and in the U.S Embassy in Haiti, and at the U.S. Embassy Office in Berlin, Germany.

Mr. Haas holds a BA in International Studies and German from Illinois Wesleyan University. He attended the London School of Economics as a Marshall Scholar, where he earned MSc (Econ) degrees in both the Politics of the World Economy and Comparative Government. He is the recipient of multiple State Department performance awards including the James Clement Dunn Award for Excellence and the Cordell Hull Award for Economic Achievement by Senior Officers.  His foreign languages are French and German.

 

Back to Top
§ 456.242 UR plan requirements for medical care evaluation studies. ( a ) The UR plan must describe the methods that the committee uses to select and conduct medical care evaluation studies under paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
( b ) The UR plan must provide that the UR committee— ( 1 ) Determines the methods to be used in selecting and conducting medical care evaluation studies in the mental hospital;
( 2 ) Documents for each study— ( i ) Its results; and
( ii ) How the results have been used to make changes to improve the quality of care and promote more effective and efficient use of facilities and services;
( 3 ) Analyzes its findings for each study; and
( 4 ) Takes action as needed to— ( i ) Correct or investigate further any deficiencies or problems in the review process; or
( ii ) Recommend more effective and efficient hospital care procedures.
§ 455.1 Basis and scope. This part sets forth requirements for a State fraud detection and investigation program, and for disclosure of information on ownership and control. ( a ) Under the authority of sections 1902(a)(4), 1903(i)(2), and 1909 of the Social Security Act, Subpart A provides State plan requirements for the identification, investigation, and referral of suspected fraud and abuse cases. In addition, the subpart requires that the State— ( 1 ) Report fraud and abuse information to the Department; and
( 2 ) Have a method to verify whether services reimbursed by Medicaid were actually furnished to beneficiaries.
( b ) Subpart B implements sections 1124, 1126, 1902(a)(36), 1903(i)(2), and 1903(n) of the Act. It requires that providers and fiscal agents must agree to disclose ownership and control information to the Medicaid State agency.
( c ) Subpart C implements section 1936 of the Act. It establishes the Medicaid Integrity Program under which the Secretary will promote the integrity of the program by entering into contracts with eligible entities to carry out the activities of subpart C.
[51 FR 34787, Sept. 30, 1986, as amended at 72 FR 67655, Nov. 30, 2007]
HomeKey Topics – Office of Regional Security and Arms Transfers...Legal Basis for Arms Transfers

# 									Legal Basis for Arms Transfers							

Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

Each arms transfer request or third party transfer submitted to PM/RSAT for approval undergoes a legal review to ensure it meets the requirements demanded by the Foreign Assistance Act (FAA) and Arms Export Control Act (AECA).

Both  § 4 of the AECA and  § 502 of the FAA state that defense articles and services shall be furnished or sold solely:
        - for internal security;
        - for legitimate self-defense;
        - to permit the recipient country to participate in regional or collective arrangements consistent with the Charter of the United Nations; or
        - to assist militaries in less developed countries to construct public works and to support economic and social development activities.

Section 3 of the AECA and § 505 of the FAA provide further legal direction to PM/RSAT stating:
        - no defense article shall be sold or leased by the United States Government…to any country…and no agreement shall be entered into for any cooperative project unless:

— the country shall have agreed not to transfer title to, or possession of, any defense article or related training or other defense service so furnished to it, or produced in a cooperative project, to anyone not an officer, employee, or agent of that country, and not to use or permit the use of such article or related training or other defense service for purposes other than those for which furnished unless the consent of the President has first been obtained;

— the country shall have agreed that it will maintain the security of such article or service and will provide substantially the same degree of protection afforded to such article or service by the United States Government.

And for defense articles transferred by grant:
        - the country shall have agreed that the net proceeds of sale received by such country in disposing of any…implement of war received under this chapter will be paid to the United States Government.

Tags

Bureau of Political-Military AffairsDefense ArticlesDefense Trade ControlsPolitical-Military Cooperation

Back to Top
§ 435.210 Optional eligibility for individuals who meet the income and resource requirements of the cash assistance programs. ( a ) *Basis.* This section implements section 1902(a)(10)(A)(ii)(I) of the Act.
( b ) *Eligibility.* The agency may provide Medicaid to any group or groups of individuals specified in § 435.201(a)(1) through (3) who meet the income and resource requirements of SSI or an optional State supplement program in States that provide Medicaid to optional State supplement recipients.
[81 FR 86452, Nov. 30, 2016]
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3240

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify the prohibition

against lobbying.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 15, 1996

Mr. DORNAN (for himself and Mr. WOLF) introduced the following bill; which

was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify

the prohibition against lobbying.

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

3 SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF LOBBYING PROHIBITION

4 APPLICABLE TO CERTAIN CHARITIES.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (h) of section 501 of

6 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to expendi7 tures by public charities to influence legislation) is amend8 ed by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

9 ‘‘(9) CLARIFICATION OF SUBSTANTIALITY

10 TEST.—An organization described in paragraph (5),
2

•HR 3240 IH

1 or an organization described in paragraph (3) which

2 does not make the election described in paragraph

3 (3), shall be denied exemption from taxation under

4 subsection (a) because a substantial part of the ac5 tivities of such organization consists of carrying on

6 propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence

7 legislation only if more than 5 percent of the total

8 expenditures of the organization for the taxable year

9 are for carrying on propaganda, or otherwise at10 tempting, to influence legislation.’’

11 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

12 subsection (a) shall apply to taxable years beginning after

13 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 347

To repeal the requirement that ships’ stores of the Navy be operated as

nonappropriated fund instrumentalities.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. PICKETT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on National Security

A BILL

To repeal the requirement that ships’ stores of the Navy

be operated as nonappropriated fund instrumentalities.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Ships’ Stores Funding

5 Act of 1995’’.
2

•HR 347 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPEAL OF NAFI REQUIREMENT FOR SHIPS’

2 STORES.

3 (a) REPEAL.—Subsections (a) and (b) of section 371

4 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year

5 1994 (Public Law 103–160; 107 Stat. 1634) are repealed.

6 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Subsection (d) of

7 such section is amended by striking out ‘‘the date on

8 which the Secretary of the Navy completes the conversion

9 referred to in subsection (a)’’ and inserting in lieu thereof

10 ‘‘the date of the enactment of the Ships’ Stores Funding

11 Act of 1995’’.

Æ
§ 424.5 Basic conditions. ( a ) As a basis for Medicare payment, the following conditions must be met: ( 1 ) *Types of services.* The services must be— ( i ) Covered services, as specified in part 409 or part 410 of this chapter; or
( ii ) Services excluded from coverage as custodial care or services not reasonable and necessary, but reimbursable in accordance with §§ 405.332 through 405.334 of this chapter, pertaining to limitation of liability.
( 2 ) *Sources of services.* The services must have been furnished by a provider, nonparticipating hospital, or supplier that was, at the time it furnished the services, qualified to have payment made for them.
( 3 ) *Beneficiary of services.* Except as provided in § 409.68 of this chapter, the services must have been furnished while the individual was eligible to have payment made for them. (Section 409.68 provides for payment of inpatient hospital services furnished before the hospital is notified that the beneficiary has exhausted the Medicare benefits available for the current benefit period.)
( 4 ) *Certification of need for services.* When required, the provider must obtain certification and recertification of the need for the services in accordance with subpart B of this part.
( 5 ) *Claim for payment.* The provider, supplier, or beneficiary, as appropriate, must file a claim that includes or makes reference to a request for payment, in accordance with subpart C of this part.
( 6 ) *Sufficient information.* The provider, supplier, or beneficiary, as appropriate, must furnish to the intermediary or carrier sufficient information to determine whether payment is due and the amount of payment.
( b ) Additional conditions applicable in certain circumstances or to certain services are set forth in other sections of this part.
[53 FR 6635, Mar. 2, 1988; 53 FR 12945, Apr. 20, 1988; 60 FR 38271, July 26, 1995]
- Office Home
- About Us
- Key Topics

HomeKey Topics – Office of Environmental Quality...Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade

# 									Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade							

Office of Environmental Quality

**What is the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade?**

The Rotterdam Convention is an international treaty designed to facilitate informed decision-making by countries with regard to trade in hazardous chemicals. It establishes a list of covered chemicals and requires parties seeking to export a chemical on that list to first establish that the intended importing country has consented to the import. It also requires that a party seeking to export a chemical that is not listed under the Convention but that is subject to a ban or severe restriction in its own territory must provide notice to the importing country of the proposed export. The Convention entered into force on February 24, 2004.

**How Does the Prior Informed Consent Procedure Work?**

The Rotterdam Convention establishes a prior informed consent (“PIC”) procedure to ensure that restricted hazardous chemicals are not exported to countries that do not wish to receive them. The PIC procedure does not ban or restrict any chemicals, nor does it mean that any individual country must automatically prohibit their import. Parties implement the PIC procedure through extensive information exchange, priority attention to national decisions on imports, and obligations related to export controls.

**What Chemicals Are Covered Under the Rotterdam Convention?**

The Rotterdam Convention applies to industrial chemicals and pesticides that meet the criteria for listing under the Convention, generally because they have been banned or severely restricted in party countries or are severely hazardous pesticide formulations. Chemicals are subject to the PIC procedure if they are included in Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention. A current list can be found here.

**How does the United States engage?**

The United States signed the Rotterdam Convention in 1998, but has yet to ratify because we currently lack the authority to implement all of its provisions. The United States participates as an observer in the conferences of the parties and in technical working groups.

-  Discover More-  														Rotterdam Convention																													 
 

Tags

Export ControlsExportsTrade and Investment

Back to Top