alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...International Day of UN Peacekeepers

# 									International Day of UN Peacekeepers							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

May 29, 2023

This May 29th, on the 75th anniversary of UN peacekeeping, the United States reaffirms its enduring commitment to UN peacekeepers and recognizes their indispensable role in addressing shared threats to international peace and security.

Today we honor the more than 4,200 military, police, and civilians who have given their lives for the cause of peace, reconciliation, and recovery. And we salute the bravery, service, and sacrifice of the more than one million men and women from 125 countries who have served – or are now serving – in UN peacekeeping missions around the world.

Since the first mission in 1948, UN peacekeeping has proven to be remarkably important to advancing the cause for peace. Its core objective is what we strive to deliver: To help countries move from conflict to sustainable peace.

The United States is the largest financial contributor to UN peacekeeping over the last 75 years. We also provide training and equipment to help partners develop key enabling capabilities and invest heavily in long-term bilateral capacity-building partnerships essential to mission success through efforts such as the Global Peace Operations Initiative.

The United States invests in peacekeeping because it works. Data from the last seven decades show that peacekeeping reduces violence, contains civil wars, brings leaders to the table, and increases the odds of lasting peace. Peacekeeping is a shared responsibility that benefits all nations and peoples, and the United States will continue to be its leading proponent.

 

Tags

Office of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of StateUN and Related Organizations

Back to Top
§ 435.110 Parents and other caretaker relatives. ( a ) *Basis.* This section implements sections 1931(b) and (d) of the Act.
( b ) *Scope.* The agency must provide Medicaid to parents and other caretaker relatives, as defined in § 435.4, and, if living with such parent or other caretaker relative, his or her spouse, whose household income is at or below the income standard established by the agency in the State plan, in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section.
( c ) *Income standard.* The agency must establish in its State plan the income standard as follows: ( 1 ) The minimum income standard is a State's AFDC income standard in effect as of May 1, 1988 for the applicable family size converted to a MAGI-equivalent standard in accordance with guidance issued by the Secretary under section 1902(e)(14)(A) and (E) of the Act.
( 2 ) The maximum income standard is the higher of— ( i ) The effective income level in effect for section 1931 low-income families under the Medicaid State plan or waiver of the State plan as of March 23, 2010 or December 31, 2013, if higher, converted to a MAGI-equivalent standard in accordance with guidance issued by the Secretary under section 1902(e)(14)(A) and (E) of the Act; or
( ii ) A State's AFDC income standard in effect as of July 16, 1996 for the applicable family size, increased by no more than the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers between July 16, 1996 and the effective date of such increase.
[77 FR 17204, Mar. 23, 2012, as amended at 78 FR 42302, July 15, 2013]
# C_2006086EN.01002901.xml

| 8.4.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 86/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 86/29

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 13 January 2006 — Komninou and Others v Commission

(Case T-42/04) (1)

1

(Action for damages - Non-contractual liability - Decision to take no further action on a complaint putting in issue a Member State's conduct capable of giving rise to proceedings for failure to fulfil obligations - Treatment of the complaint by the Commission - Principle of sound administration)

(2006/C 86/57)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties:

Applicants: Ermioni Komninou, Grigorios Ntokos, Donatos Pappas, Vassileios Pappas, Aristeidis Pappas, Eleftheria Pappa, Lamprini Pappa, Eirini Pappa, Alexandra Ntokou, Léonidas Grepis, Nikolaos Grepis, Fotios Dimitriou, Zoïs Dimitriou, Petros Bolossis, Despoina Bolossi, Konstantinos Bolossis and Thomas Bolossis (Parga, Greece) (represented by: P. Stroumpos, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M. Konstantinidis, Agent)

Defendant:

Application for

Compensation for the non-material damage allegedly suffered by the applicants because of the Commission's conduct in the treatment of their complaint concerning alleged infringements by the Hellenic Republic of Community environment law.

Operative part of the Order

| 1. | The application is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application is dismissed.

| 2. | The applicants shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicants shall bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 85 of 3.4.2004

1

---
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Quenton N. BROWN v. C. Paul PHELPS.

No. 65024.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 4, 1979.

In re Quenton N. Brown applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 5-79-646.

Writ denied. Relator’s appeal to the Secretary of Corrections on June 2, 1979, from the disciplinary board’s ruling was not made within 7 days, as required by the disciplinary rules, p. 5 (1977). Having failed to exercise rights to administrative review his application for review was appropriately not considered by the trial court. R.S. 49:964; *State ex rel. Armistead v. Phelps,*365 So.2d 468 (La.1978).
HomeTelecommunications Status Lists...1. Agreement Relating to the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization, done at Washington August 20, 1971

# 									1. Agreement Relating to the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization, done at Washington August 20, 1971							

Depositary – Treaty Affairs

Office of Treaty Affairs

Entered into force February 12, 1973, in accordance with Article XX of the Agreement.
Download Status List						 [232 KB]

Tags

MultilateralTelecommunicationsTreaties

Back to Top
HomeBureau of Diplomatic Security...DSS, HSI Partner with Namibian Police on Arrests in Pangolin Trafficking Case

# 									DSS, HSI Partner with Namibian Police on Arrests in Pangolin Trafficking Case							

DSS Articles

The United States Embassy - Windhoek, Namibia 

August 13, 2020

During a first of its kind cooperation between U.S. law enforcement and the Namibian Police (Nampol), four suspected pangolin traffickers were arrested on July 21 in Namibia.

Time-sensitive information received by the Homeland Security Investigations office in Pretoria relating to an imminent dealing by criminals in the illegal sale of a live pangolin was passed to the U.S. Embassy Windhoek’s Regional Security Officer which was shared with Nampol. Based on the information, the Blue Rhino Task Team was able to successfully arrest four suspects.

One live pangolin was recovered along with four pangolin skins and loose scales which were confiscated. All of the accused persons remain in custody pending a formal bail application on August 13. This investigation may lead to further arrests and is a great example of the shared cooperation between the United States and Namibia to counter illegal wildlife trafficking.

**VIDEO**: https://youtu.be/j3WnxKhGx5I

Click here to view the original article

Tags

Bureau of Diplomatic SecurityDiplomatic SecurityDSS ArticlesNamibia

Back to Top
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23
                                                                
                      [LETTERHEAD OF ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP]

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by 
reference of our report dated January 20, 1997 included in this Form 10-K, into 
High Point Financial Corp.'s previously filed Registration Statement No. 2-97635
on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 33-12243 on Form S-2, Registration 
Statement No. 33-18227 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 33-18226 on Form 
S-3, Registration Statement No. 33-22288 on Form S-3, Registration Statement No.
33-37621 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 33-76296 on Form S-2.


                                /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP


                                    Arthur Andersen LLP


Roseland, New Jersey
March 28, 1997
#### HARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEMNITY COMPANY and Publix Supermarkets, Inc., Petitioners, v. Bonita Marie McGANN and Brian John McGann, her husband, Respondents.

No. 81-1161.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 2, 1981.

*1362Kent S. Pratt for Richard H. Gaunt, Jr., of the Law Offices of Frank G. Cibula, Jr., West Palm Beach, for petitioners.

N. Richard Schopp, Port Lucie, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners seek review by certiorari of a discovery order entered by the trial court in a personal injury case arising out of a slip and fall in a super market.

Respondents filed a complaint alleging that Bonita Marie McGann was injured in a super market owned by Publix Supermarkets, Inc., when she slipped and fell as a result of the negligence of the owner. Respondents filed a request to produce, in which, among other things, they sought production of “a copy of all statements taken by the employees or agents of Publix Supermarkets, Inc., concerning Bonita Marie McGann’s accident on July 11, 1980.” Petitioners’ objection to said request on the grounds that the alleged statements were “work product” was overruled by the trial court.

The request to produce is authorized by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.350. It is to be noted via the Committee Note that this rule no longer contains the good cause requirement of the former rule. Thus, if no objection is made, production is had without a court order. If objection is made necessitating a court hearing, then in the case of a party objecting on grounds of the work product privilege, that party has the burden, first of showing the privilege. *Surette v. Galiardo,*323 So.2d 53 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); *Hospital Corporation of America v. Dixon,*330 So.2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). At that point it would be incumbent upon the moving party to demonstrate the necessity for the production as required in Rule 1.280(b)(2), i. e., that he has a need of the materials in the preparation of his case and that he is unable, without undue hardship, to obtain the substantial equivalent of the materials by other means.

It seems to us that petitioners failed to demonstrate that the statements were privileged and thus they cannot contend in this court that respondents failed to show the necessity required by Rule 1.280(b)(2). *Hospital Corporation of America v.*Dixon, *supra.*

Accordingly, the petition for writ of cer-tiorari is denied.

LETTS, C. J., and DOWNEY and HERSEY, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1





Certification of CEO and CFO

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 on Form 10-KSB of Century Properties Fund XIX (the "Partnership"), for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Martha L. Long, as the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer of the Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the Chief Financial Officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:



(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 results of operations of the Partnership.



| |                        
| | -----------------------
| | /s/Martha L. Long      
| | Name: Martha L. Long   
| | Date: March 31, 2008   
| |                        
| | /s/Stephen B. Waters   
| | Name: Stephen B. Waters
| | Date: March 31, 2008   



This certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 349 Introduced in House (IH)]

                                    

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 349

    To amend title 39, United States Code, to provide that certain 
   periodical publications shall not be bound publications for mail 
                        classification purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

  Mr. Porter introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Government Reform and Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title 39, United States Code, to provide that certain 
   periodical publications shall not be bound publications for mail 
                        classification purposes.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS EXCLUDED FROM CLASSIFICATION 
              AS BOUND PUBLICATIONS.

    Section 3626 of title 39, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(n) In the administration of this section, a weekly periodical 
publication which is eligible to publish legal notices under the laws 
of any State, the pages of which were customarily secured by 2 staples 
before March 19, 1989, shall not be considered to be a bound 
publication for mail classification purposes solely because its pages 
continue to be secured by 2 staples after that date.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT XI

                            U.S.B. HOLDING CO., INC.

                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

            For the Three Years Ended December 31, 1997, 1996, 1995

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                  1997          1996           1995
                                              -----------   -----------    -----------
                                                      (000's, except share data)
<S>                                           <C>           <C>            <C>
Weighted average number of common
      shares outstanding                       12,401,562    12,330,222*    12,117,283*

Assuming exercise of options reduced by
      the number of shares which could
      have been purchased with the proceeds
      from exercise of such options             1,121,620       695,772*       492,233*
                                              -----------   -----------    -----------

Adjusted weighted average                      13,523,182    13,025,994*    12,609,516*
                                              ===========   ===========    ===========
Net income                                    $    10,402   $     9,414    $     9,327

Less: Preferred stock dividend requirements            45           294            315
                                              -----------   -----------    -----------
Net income available to common stockholders   $    10,357   $     9,120    $     9,012
                                              ===========   ===========    ===========
Basic earnings per share                      $       .84   $       .74*   $       .74*
                                              ===========   ===========    ===========
Diluted earnings per share                    $       .77   $       .70*   $       .71*
                                              ===========   ===========    ===========
</TABLE>

----------

* Adjusted for stock split in December 1997
###### Editorial Note on Part 411

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 411 appear at 71 FR 9471, Feb. 24, 2006

#### § 411.388 When advisory opinions are not admissible evidence.

The failure of a party to seek or to receive an advisory opinion may not be introduced into evidence to prove that the party either intended or did not intend to violate the provisions of sections 1128, 1128A or 1128B of the Act.

[69 FR 57230, Sept. 24, 2004]
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 343 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 343

To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to reauthorize the conservation 
                            reserve program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 1995

Mr. Peterson of Minnesota (for himself, Mr. de la Garza, Mr. Brewster, 
 Mr. Combest, Mr. Minge, Mr. Hilliard, Mr. Pomeroy, Mr. Oberstar, and 
 Ms. Danner) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to reauthorize the conservation 
                            reserve program.

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF CONSERVATION RESERVE PROGRAM.

    Chapter 1 of subtitle D of title XII of the Food Security Act of 
1985 (16 U.S.C. 3830 et seq.) is amended by striking ``1995'' each 
place it appears in section 1230(a), subsections (a), (b)(3), and (d) 
of section 1231, and section 1232(c) and inserting ``2005''.
                                 <all>
```
#### David F. D. A. Smith *v.*Richard I. Usher.

Maltbie, C. J., Brown, Jennings, Ells and Dickenson, Js.

Argued June 2

decided June 23, 1943.

*Isaac J. Kunik,*for the appellant (plaintiff).

*Albert B. Walker,*with whom was *Peter J. May,*for the appellee (defendant).

Per Curiam.

No material corrections can be made in the finding. The plaintiff was operating a motorcycle in a westerly direction on North Main Street, Manchester. The defendant was driving a passenger *205car in the opposite direction on the same road. They collided at an intersection where the Tolland Turnpike enters North Main Street from the northeast. The defendant had been following another eastbound car. The operator of this car indicated with his hand an intention to turn left into the Tolland Turnpike and proceeded to do so, bearing to the left of the center line. The defendant gave a similar signal and started to follow the car ahead. In so doing he proceeded somewhat to his left of the center line of the highway. The plaintiff was approaching the intersection at about forty-five miles per hour, but was hidden from the defendant’s view by the car between. This car was abruptly turned to its right, disclosing the presence of the motorcycle to the defendant for the first time. The defendant applied his brakes and turned to his left and his car was practically at a standstill when it was struck by the motorcycle north of the center line of North Main Street.

On these facts the trial court found that, while the defendant had failed to keep to the right of the center of the intersection while turning to his left, this was not a proximate cause of the collision, and also found that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence. The main contention of the plaintiff in his brief is that he had the statutory right of way and, therefore, there was no contributory negligence. The determination of this question is decisive of the case.

From the subordinate facts found it appears that the plaintiff was familiar with the intersection; that he had unobstructed visibility of it for several hundred feet as he approached it and saw or reasonably should have seen the defendant within it, making a left turn; and that he thereafter approached the intersection at the rate of speed of forty-five miles per hour. The trial court has found that the plaintiff did *206not have the right of way; but it has found him neglir gent and reference to the memorandum of decision shows that it reached this conclusion even upon an assumption that he did have the right of way. Though he did have it, he was bound “to operate his car as a reasonably prudent person with the knowledge that he had the right of way would operate his car under like circumstances.” *Jackson*v. *Brown,*106 Conn. 143, 146, 137 Atl. 725; *Carlin*v. *Haas,*124 Conn. 259, 264, 199 Atl. 430; s. c., 126 Conn. 8, 14, 8 Atl. (2d) 530. It was a question of fact for the trial court to decide whether or not he used such care.

There is no error.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 19 (Friday, January 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 5645]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-2189]



[[Page 5645]]

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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

Agency Holding the Meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, February 20, 2009.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered: Surveillance matters.

Contact Person for More Information: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Staff Assistant.
 [FR Doc. E9-2189 Filed 1-28-09; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
# C_2006154EN.01001305.xml

| 1.7.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 154/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.7.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 154/13

---

Order of the President of the Fifth Chamber of the Court of 26 January 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v French Republic

(Case C-92/05) (1)

1

(2006/C 154/32)

Language of the case: French

Language of the case: French

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 82, 02.04.2005.

1

---
§ 435.631 General requirements for determining income eligibility in States using more restrictive requirements for Medicaid than SSI. ( a ) *Income eligibility methods.* In determining income eligibility of aged, blind, and disabled individuals in a State using more restrictive eligibility requirements than SSI, the agency must use the methods for treating income elected under §§ 435.121 and 435.230, under § 435.601. The methods used must be comparable for all individuals within each category of individuals under § 435.121 and each category of individuals within each optional categorically needy group included under § 435.230 and for each category of individuals under the medically needy option described under § 435.800.
( b ) *Categorically needy versus medically needy eligibility.* ( 1 ) Individuals who have income equal to, or below, the categorically needy income standards described in §§ 435.121 and 435.230 are categorically needy in States that include the medically needy under their plans.
( 2 ) Categorically needy eligibility in States that do not include the medically needy is determined in accordance with the provisions of § 435.121 (e)(4) and (e)(5).
[58 FR 4932, Jan. 19, 1993]