alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CA2006117EN.01000501.xml

| 18.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 117/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 117/5

---

RESERVE LIST
   (1)

RESERVE LIST

1

OPEN COMPETITION EPSO/AD/31/05

OPEN COMPETITION EPSO/AD/31/05

LAWYER-LINGUISTS (AD6)

LAWYER-LINGUISTS (AD6)

having English as their main language

(2006/C 117 A/03)

BONSALL Peter

CARTER Elizabeth Jane

CULLEN Peter Joseph

DEMENEIX Ariane

HENRY David

HOBBS Stephen James

MCANDREW Robert

METCALF James

NICKOLS Guy

O'KEEFFE June

ORR Christine

O'SULLIVAN Denis

The reserve list will be valid until 31 December 2007 and may be extended.

31 December 2007

---

(1)  A successful candidate may explicitly request that her/his name not be published.

1

---
Home2024 Certificates of Competency for Nominees to be Chiefs of Mission...Dressel, Abigail L. – Republic of Angola and Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe – May 2024

# 									Dressel, Abigail L. – Republic of Angola and Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe – May 2024							

Certificate of Competency

May 9, 2024

UNITED STATES SENATE

SUBJECT:                  Ambassadorial Nomination:  Certificate of

Demonstrated Competence — Foreign Service

Act, Section 304(a)(4)

 

POST:                         Republic of Angola and Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe

 

CANDIDATE:             Abigail L. Dressel

 

Abigail L. Dressel, a career member of the Senior Foreign Service with the rank of Minister-Counselor, is currently the Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina.  Previously, she served as Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Maputo, Mozambique.  Prior to that, she was Counselor for Public Affairs at the U.S. Embassies in Colombia and Brazil.  As the Director of the Office of International Media Engagement in the Bureau of Public Affairs, Dressel led the Department of State’s outreach to major international media outlets.  Previous assignments include tours at the U.S. Embassies in Lisbon, Luanda, Lima, and San Salvador.  Dressel’s broad experience with African affairs, combined with her demonstrated ability to build and lead teams effectively in challenging environments, make her well-qualified to serve as U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Angola and the Democratic Republic of Sao Tome and Principe.

Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Dressel worked in international development.  A native of Connecticut, Dressel holds a B.A. from The George Washington University.  She is the recipient of numerous State Department performance awards, including two Senior Foreign Service Performance awards.  She speaks fluent Spanish and Portuguese.

Back to Top
§ 423.2615 Review by the Administrator. ( a ) *Request for review by Administrator.* If a Part D plan sponsor is dissatisfied with the hearing official's decision, it may request that the CMS Administrator review the decision. ( 1 ) The request must be filed with the CMS Administrator within 30 calendar days of the date of the hearing official's decision.
( 2 ) The request must provide evidence or reasons to substantiate the request.
( b ) *Content of request.* The Part D plan sponsor must submit with its request all supporting documentation, evidence, and substantiation that it wants to be considered. ( 1 ) Documentation, evidence, or substantiation submitted after the filing of the request will not be considered.
( 2 ) Neither the Part D plan sponsor nor CMS may submit new evidence.
( c ) *Discretionary review.* After receiving a request for review, the CMS Administrator has the discretion to review the hearing official's decision in accordance with paragraph (e) of this section or to decline to review said decision.
( d ) *Notification of decision whether to review.* The CMS Administrator notifies the Part D plan sponsor within 45 days of receiving the Part D plan sponsor's hearing request of whether he or she intends to review the hearing official's decision. If the Administrator agrees to review the hearing official's decision, CMS may file a rebuttal statement within 30 days of the Administrator's notice to the plan sponsor that the request for review has been accepted. CMS sends its rebuttal statement to the plan sponsor at the same time it is submitted to the Administrator. If the CMS Administrator declines to review the hearing official's decision, the hearing official's decision is final and binding.
( e ) *Administrator review.* If the CMS Administrator agrees to review the hearing official's decision, he or she determines, based upon this decision, the hearing record, and any arguments submitted by the Part D plan sponsor or CMS in accordance with this section, whether the determination should be upheld, reversed, or modified. The CMS Administrator furnishes a written decision, which is final and binding, to the Part D plan sponsor and to CMS.
§ 426.513 Participation as *amicus curiae.* ( a ) *Petition for participation.* Any person or organization that wishes to participate as *amicus curiae* must timely file with the Board a petition that concisely states— ( 1 ) The petitioner's interest in the hearing;
( 2 ) Who will represent the petitioner; and
( 3 ) The issues on which the petitioner intends to present argument.
( b ) *The nature of the proposed amicus participation.* An *amicus curiae* is not a party to the hearing but may participate by— ( 1 ) Submitting a written statement of position to the Board before the beginning of the hearing;
( 2 ) Presenting a brief oral statement or other evidence at the hearing, at the point in the proceedings specified by the Board; and
( 3 ) Submitting a brief or a written statement when the parties submit briefs.
( c ) *Service by amicus curiae.* Serving copies of any briefs or written statements on all parties.
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Universal American Corp.
(the Registrant) for the year ended December 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Richard
A. Barasch, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, and Robert A. Waegelein,
Chief Financial Officer of the Registrant, 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, as amended; and  (2)   The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date:
  March 9, 2009
  /s/  RICHARD
  A. BARASCHRichard
  A. BaraschChief Executive Officer   Date:
  March 9, 2009
  /s/  ROBERT A. WAEGELEINRobert A. WaegeleinChief Financial Officer  A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(b) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided
to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference
into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-K),
irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing  1
No. 99-690.

#### Adams *v.*North Carolina.

Ct. App. N. C. Certiorari denied.
Summary of Interagency Working Comments on Draft Language under 

EO12866/13563 Interagency Review. Subject to Further Policy Review.

1

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Proposed Rule

Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standardo s for New and Modified Sources

RIN 2060-AS30

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) Comments:

1. Reviewer recommends removing the revenue offset from the cost column and put it in the 

benefit column, adjusting the numbers accordingly throughout the RIA.

EPA response: In this particular rulemaking, like our 2012 oil and gas NSPS and 

NESHAP and our rulemakings in the refineries sector, any revenue from the sale of 

recovered natural gas is earned directly by the regulated entity through the direct act of 

compliance. Therefore, the net compliance cost for the directly regulated entity will be 

capital and operations and maintenance costs minus any potential revenue earned as a 

direct result of compliance. EPA believes this to be the appropriate measure of the cost 

burden being placed on affected sources for the purpose of compliance. This situation is 

not analogous to other cases where EPA has reported ‘fuel savings’ as a separate line 

item in RIA summary tables. For example, in the vehicle rules where this approach was 

taken, any reduction in expenditures associated with firms’ compliance accrued to 

consumers and not the firms directly. However, in this case any revenue from captured 

product is a direct offset of the compliance costs for the firms.

2. Reviewer recommends inserting the length of the analytic timeline in p.1-2.

EPA response: We added language about the analytical timeframe.

3. Reviewer recommends deleting the NAAQS language in pp. 4-4 and 4-5.

EPA response: We revised this language, deleted, some text, and moved other text to a 

footnote. We feel the revised version makes the point more clearly.

4. Reviewer recommends replacing OMB’s OIRA with OMB on p. 4-9.

EPA response: We added language about the analytical timeframe.
HomeBureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement AffairsRemarks & Releases...Joint Statement: Sixth Meeting of the North American Drug Dialogue

# 									Joint Statement: Sixth Meeting of the North American Drug Dialogue							

Joint Statement

Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs

Ottawa, Canada

November 9, 2022

Senior officials from Canada, Mexico and the United States met on November 7 and 8, 2022 in Ottawa and virtually, for the Sixth North American Drug Dialogue (NADD). A result of the 2016 North American Leaders’ Summit (NALS), the NADD is the principal mechanism through which our three countries address current and emerging drug threats facing North America.

At the November 2022 meeting, representatives from the three countries reviewed progress since the Fifth NADD meeting in February 2022, with particular attention paid to trends in trafficking of illegal drugs and commercial disruption to address the ways in which criminals exploit the legitimate commercial supply chain. The three countries also agreed to a path forward for the NADD that expands our cooperation and updates our strategic objectives. This fulfills a commitment made by the Prime Minister of Canada and the Presidents of Mexico and the United States at the November 2021 NALS and is expected to support strengthened collaboration to address illegal drugs and associated public health and safety concerns.

In 2023, the three countries will continue and enhance our work to:
        - Strengthen our public health approaches related to prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery services;
        - understand and address the illegal supply chain of illegal synthetic drugs and their precursor chemicals and related equipment affecting North America, especially those causing the most harm to our populations;
        - address drug trafficking via multiple modes of transport; and,
        - better understand and address the illegal drug-related financing methods and activities that support operating capital, access and profit from illegal drug sales, and facilitate new and existing partnerships amongst the relevant stakeholders.

 

Tags

Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement AffairsCanadaDrug TraffickingDrugsLaw EnforcementMexicoUnited States

Back to Top
#### FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, etc., Appellants, v. C. O. BARNARD AND SON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., Appellee.

No. 74-1074.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 9, 1974.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
§ 436.121 Qualified family members. ( a ) *Definition.* A *qualified family member* is any member of a family, including pregnant women and children eligible for Medicaid under § 436.120 of this subpart, who would be receiving AFDC cash benefits on the basis of the unemployment of the principal wage earner under section 407 of the Act had the State not chosen to place time limits on those benefits as permitted under section 407(b)(2)(B)(i) of the Act.
( b ) *State plan requirement.* The State plan must provide that the State makes Medicaid available to any individual who meets the definition of “qualified family member” as specified in paragraph (a) of this section.
( c ) *Applicability.* The provisions in this section are applicable from October 1, 1992, through September 30, 1998.
[58 FR 48614, Sept. 17, 1993]
Home2022 Certificates of Competency for Nominees to be Chiefs of Mission...Korhonen, Rachna Sachdeva – Republic of Mali – April 2022

# 									Korhonen, Rachna Sachdeva – Republic of Mali – April 2022							

Certificate of Competency

April 29, 2022

UNITED STATES SENATE

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

POST: Republic of Mali

CANDIDATE: Rachna Sachdeva Korhonen

Rachna Korhonen is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service, class of Counselor. She currently serves as the Executive Director of the combined Executive Offices of the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs and Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs. Previously, Ms. Korhonen was the Consul General and Principal Officer of the U.S. Consulate, Dhahran, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. She also led the Management Section of the U.S. Embassy in Colombo, Sri Lanka and, in Washington, served as the Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Management. Ms. Korhonen’s demonstrated leadership ability, her considerable excellence both in diplomacy and the private sector, and her record of achievement, as documented in over a dozen performance awards, makes her a well-qualified candidate to serve as Ambassador to the Republic of Mali.

Among her other assignments, Ms. Korhonen was the Supervisory General Services Officer and Senior Human Resources Officer at the U.S. Embassy in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and the Political Chief of the Provincial Reconstruction Team in Kirkuk, Iraq. She also had assignments at the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait and at the U.S. Consulate General in Mumbai, India. Before joining the State Department, Ms. Korhonen was, among other positions, the Sales Director for Infosys Corporation and prior to that the Director of U.S. Sales for Sonera Zed Corporation.

Ms. Korhonen earned her B.S. from Empire State College. She speaks Hindi, French, Finnish and Arabic and, in addition to the performance awards mentioned above, she is also the recipient of the Expeditionary Service Award from the State Department.

Back to Top
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*LIDA NOSIK

*Andrew B. Bowman,*in support of the petition.

*Michael E. O’Hare,*deputy assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

Decided April 3, 1997

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 44 Conn. App. 294 (AC 14975), is granted, limited to the following issue:

> “Whether the Appellate Court properly held that (1) the evidence of the defendant’s alleged marriage in New Jersey did not establish a valid marriage under Connecticut law; and (2) as such, the evidence presented at the defendant’s trial was sufficient to convict the defendant?”

BORDEN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of the petition.
§ 435.125 Individuals eligible as qualifying individuals. ( a ) *Basis.* This section implements sections 1902(a)(10)(E)(iv) and 1905(p)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act.
( b ) *Eligibility.* The agency must provide medical assistance to individuals who meet the eligibility requirements in § 435.123(b), except that income is at least 120 percent, but is less than 135 percent of the Federal poverty level.
( c ) *Scope.* Medical assistance included in paragraph (b) of this section includes the following: ( 1 ) For individuals entitled to Medicare Part A as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, coverage for the Part B premium.
( 2 ) For individuals enrolled under Medicare Part B for coverage of immunosuppressive drugs as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, only payment of the Part B premium related to enrollment in Medicare Part B for coverage of immunosuppressive drugs.
[87 FR 66511, Nov. 3, 2022]
#### Charles E. E. McCann, Respondent, *v.*John Gibson, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Municipal Court, tenth district, New York city, rendered in favor of the plaintiff, for the sum of $14:5, damages and costs.

P. A. McManus, for appellant.

Charles E. F. McCann, for respondent.

MacLean, J.

In the early part of January, 1897, the plaintiff, through his father, sent a horse by the defendant to one ■Shove, recommended by the defendant and with whom defendant ■also *“*turned out ” his own horses, one or more of which were sent ■at the same time with the plaintiff’s horse. After that, the plaintiff’s father and agent was in direct communication with Shove concerning the maintenance and keep of the horse, to whom also he wrote that if he had an offer for the horse, he would sell him.

In the month of May, McCann, senior, had a conversation with ■the defendant, and then the defendant wrote Shove, saying: Mr. McCann was here at my place a few days ago and said to "me to tell you to sell his horse to the best advantage possible and make out bill for keep and report to me as soon as sold.” 'Shove sold the horse. When the McCanns learned of this, they •demanded the horse from the defendant, and, upon refusal, the plaintiff brought this action to recover damages for the conversion ■of the animal. Whatever liability the defendant thus may have incurred to the plaintiff, and ultimately to Shove, he did not assume or exercise such rights over the animal as to make him liable in an action for conversion.

The judgment of the Municipal Court should be reversed and ■a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Freedman, P. J., and Leventritt, J., concur.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.
Master Lease Agreement NSE and Scrub Oak






AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE 



MASTER LEASE AGREEMENT 



[Scrub Oak, LLC] 



        THIS
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE MASTER LEASE AGREEMENT (hereinafter the “Amendment”),
effective as of the 1st day of July, 2003, by and between SCRUB OAK, LLC, a
Utah limited liability company, whose address is 75 West Center Street, Provo, Utah 84601,
ATTN: Brooke Roney (hereinafter “Landlord”) and NU SKIN INTERNATIONAL, INC., a
Utah corporation, whose address is 75 West Center Street, Provo, Utah 84601 (hereinafter
“Tenant”). 



R E C I T A L S: 



         A.       
          Tenant has the right to renew certain leases to the premises identified on
          Schedule A to this Amendment (the “Premises”). 



         B.       
          Tenant desires to renew such leases of the Premises from Landlord. 



         C.       
          The parties desire to amend the Master Lease Agreement with respect to the
          Premises to reflect the renewal terms of the lease. 



NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of
the rents, covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, Landlord and Tenant mutually
agree to the amended terms and conditions for the Premises set forth on Schedule A
attached hereto. 







SCHEDULE A 



to 



AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE
MASTER LEASE 



[Scrub Oak, LLC] 



     



ANNEX “B” 



     1.    
          Commencement Date: July 1, 2003 



     2.    
          Premises: All of Annex B located at 1070 South 350 East 



     3.    
          Expiration Date: June 30, 2008 



     4.    
          Term: Five (5) years. 



     5.    
          Renewal Terms: None 



     6.    
          Monthly Rent: 





	MONTHS
	MONTHLY RENT

	  1-12	 	$     7,312	.50
	13-24	 	7,495	.31
	25-36	 	7,682	.69
	37-48	 	7,874	.76
	49-60	 	8,071	.63








     7.    
          Permitted Use: General warehouse storage, fleet maintenance and related
          uses. 








        LANDLORD
AND TENANT have executed this Amendment to the Lease effective as of the day and year
first above written. 



LANDLORD:



SCRUB
OAK, LLC
by
its Manager:


By:    /s/ Brooke B. Roney

Brooke B. Roney

Manager






TENANT



NU SKIN INTERNATIONAL,
INC. 



By:    /s/ D. Matthew Dorny

D. Matthew Dorny

Vice President and General Counsel
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

|   | 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                Company. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: August                19, 2008 |   |   | /s/ Jay              Rifkin           |
|--------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|                                      |   |   | Jay                Rifkin                  |
|                                      |   |   | Principal                Financial Officer |

----
#### § 433.322 Maintenance of Records.

The Medicaid agency must maintain a separate record of all overpayment activities for each provider in a manner that satisfies the retention and access requirements of 45 CFR 75.361 through 75.370.

[77 FR 31512, May 29, 2012, as amended at 81 FR 3011, Jan. 20, 2016]
#### OREGON-WASHINGTON RAILROAD & NAVIGATION COMPANY v. THE UNITED STATES.

[54 C. Cls., 131 ; 255 U. S., 339.]

Judgment was rendered in favor of the United States in the court below. On appeal the judgment was *affirmed,*and the Supreme Court decided:

Personal property of Army officers transported for them when changing stations on Government bills of lading at Government expense, pursuant to Army Regulations, is not property of the United States within the meaning of the railroad land-grant acts and is not entitled to the special-freight rates which those acts allow to the Government.

Where a railroad company for a long period, exceeding the period of the statute of limitations, made a uniform practice of charging on its books and billing and collecting the reduced land-grant rates for transportation of property of Army officers on which it was entitled to claim the higher commercial rates, acquiescing without protest in the practice and decisions of Government officials, which treated the property as publie property to which the lower rates were applicable, *held*that *472its conduct was inconsistent with any intention to reserve its right to more than it collected and that it could not recover more in the Court of Claims.

Mr. Justice McKenna

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court March 7, 1921.