alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 488.418 Secretarial authority to deny all payments. ( a ) *CMS option to deny all payment.* If a facility has not met a requirement, in addition to the authority to deny payment for all new admissions as specified in § 488.417, CMS may deny any further payment for all Medicare residents in the facility and to the State for all Medicaid residents in the facility.
( b ) *Prospective resumption of payment.* Except as provided in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, if the facility achieves substantial compliance, CMS resumes payment prospectively from the date that it verifies as the date that the facility achieved substantial compliance.
( c ) *Restriction on payment after denial of payment is imposed.* If payment to the facility or to the State resumes after denial of payment for all residents, no payment is made for the period between the date that— ( 1 ) Denial of payment was imposed; and
( 2 ) CMS verifies as the date that the facility achieved substantial compliance.
( d ) *Retroactive resumption of payment.* Except when a facility has repeated instances of substandard quality of care, as specified in paragraph (e) of this section, when CMS or the State finds that the facility was in substantial compliance before the date of the revisit, or before CMS or the survey agency received credible evidence of such compliance, payment is resumed on the date that substantial compliance was achieved, as determined by CMS.
( e ) *Resumption of payment—repeated instances of substandard care.* When CMS denies payment for all Medicare residents for repeated instances of substandard quality of care, payment is resumed when— ( 1 ) The facility achieved substantial compliance, as indicated by a revisit or written credible evidence acceptable to CMS; and
( 2 ) CMS believes that the facility will remain in substantial compliance.
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 of Noble Roman's, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul W. Mobley,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (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.


                                     /s/  Paul W. Mobley
                                     -------------------------------------------
                                     Paul W. Mobley
                                     Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
                                     Officer of Noble Roman's, Inc.

                                     March 16, 2010
§ 421.203 Carrier's failure to perform efficiently and effectively. ( a ) Failure by a carrier to meet, or demonstrate the capacity to meet, the criteria and standards specified in § 421.201 may be grounds for adverse action by the Secretary, such as contract termination or non-renewal.
( b ) Notwithstanding whether or not a carrier meets the criteria and standards specified in § 421.201, if the cost incurred by the carrier to meet its contractual requirements exceeds the amount that CMS finds to be reasonable and adequate to meet the cost which must be incurred by an efficiently and economically operated carrier, those high costs may also be grounds for adverse action.
[59 FR 682, Jan. 6, 1994]
§ 441.155 Individual plan of care. ( a ) “Individual plan of care” means a written plan developed for each beneficiary in accordance with §§ 456.180 and 456.181 of this chapter, to improve his condition to the extent that inpatient care is no longer necessary.
( b ) The plan of care must— ( 1 ) Be based on a diagnostic evaluation that includes examination of the medical, psychological, social, behavioral and developmental aspects of the beneficiary's situation and reflects the need for inpatient psychiatric care;
( 2 ) Be developed by a team of professionals specified under § 441.156 in consultation with the beneficiary; and his parents, legal guardians, or others in whose care he will be released after discharge;
( 3 ) State treatment objectives;
( 4 ) Prescribe an integrated program of therapies, activities, and experiences designed to meet the objectives; and
( 5 ) Include, at an appropriate time, post-discharge plans and coordination of inpatient services with partial discharge plans and related community services to ensure continuity of care with the beneficiary's family, school, and community upon discharge.
( c ) The plan must be reviewed every 30 days by the team specified in § 441.156 to— ( 1 ) Determine that services being provided are or were required on an inpatient basis, and
( 2 ) Recommend changes in the plan as indicated by the beneficiary's overall adjustment as an inpatient.
( d ) The development and review of the plan of care as specified in this section satisfies the utilization control requirements for— ( 1 ) Recertification under §§ 456.60(b), 456.160(b), and 456.360(b) of this subchapter; and
( 2 ) Establishment and periodic review of the plan of care under §§ 456.80, 456.180, and 456.380 of this subchapter.
[43 FR 45229, Sept. 29, 1978, as amended at 46 FR 48560, Oct. 1, 1981; 61 FR 38398, July 24, 1996]
HomePlain Writing at the Department of State...Plain Writing Guidance

# 									Plain Writing Guidance							

Office of Directives Management

## Guide the Reader through the Information

        - Who is my audience?
        - What does my audience already know about the subject?
        - What does my audience need to know?
        - What questions will my audience have?
        - What is the best outcome for my agency? What do I need to say to get this outcome?
        - What is the best outcome for the audience?  What do I need to say to get this outcome?

#### Active Voice

Use a standard [subject] [verb] [object] sentence

#### Personal Pronouns

Specifies who you are addressing in the sentence

#### Concise Sentences and Paragraphs

        - The average sentence length should be approximately 15 to 20 words
        - The average paragraph should have one topic sentence and develop one idea
        - Start with the main idea, then cover exceptions and conditions

#### Simplify Complex Information

        - Lists make it easier for the reader to identify the order of all items or steps in a process
        - Headings reveal the text’s organization
        - Headings are categorized as question, statement, or topic types
        - Tables/charts visualize data

#### Transition Words

        - Tells the audience whether the paragraph expands on the preceding paragraph, contrasts it, or takes it in a new direction
        - Transition words are categorized as pointing words, echo links, or explicit connective types

#### Define Uncommon Terms

        - Define uncommon terms (including acronyms upon first use) and use the same terms consistently
        - Use concrete and familiar verbiage when possible

Back to Top
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Mongolia National Day and 100th Anniversary

# 									Mongolia National Day and 100th Anniversary							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

July 9, 2021

On behalf of the United States, I extend my best wishes to the people of Mongolia on the 100th anniversary of Mongolia’s independence and the start of the 2021 Naadam festival.

As strategic partners and third neighbors, the United States and Mongolia enjoy a strong partnership bound by shared democratic values, respect for human rights, and the rule of law.

Even as this year’s celebrations are impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the people of the United States stand together with the Mongolian people in support of your independence, sovereignty, and traditional culture.

May the people of Mongolia enjoy a wonderful celebration!

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsMongoliaOffice of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
§ 483.116 Residents and applicants determined to require NF level of services. ( a ) *Individuals needing NF services.* If the State mental health or intellectual disability authority determines that a resident or applicant for admission to a NF requires a NF level of services, the NF may admit or retain the individual.
( b ) *Individuals needing NF services and specialized services.* If the State mental health or intellectual disability authority determines that a resident or applicant for admission requires both a NF level of services and specialized services for the mental illness or intellectual disability— ( 1 ) The NF may admit or retain the individual; and
( 2 ) The State must provide or arrange for the provision of the specialized services needed by the individual while he or she resides in the NF.
HomeBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborRemarks & Releases...Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom Statement on Blasphemy/Apostasy Laws

# 									Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom Statement on Blasphemy/Apostasy Laws							

Other Release

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor

July 26, 2018

						Download Statement												[141 KB]

**Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom**

Statement on Blasphemy/Apostasy Laws

As representatives of the international community, we stand together in support of the interconnected freedoms of religion and expression. We stand in firm opposition to laws that impede the freedom of individuals to choose a faith, practice a faith, change their religion, not have a religion, tell others about their beliefs and practices, and openly debate and discuss aspects of faith or belief, in a way which is inconsistent with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Numerous countries maintain laws criminalizing blasphemy, apostasy, or speech that might “defame” or “insult” religious sentiments. Such laws are often used as a pretext to justify vigilantism or mob violence in the name of religion, or as a false pretense to settle personal grievances. We see governments using such laws to punish individuals whose views on matters of religion or belief may differ from official narratives or the views of majority populations.

We will work collectively to encourage governments that maintain these laws to free any individuals imprisoned on such grounds, and to work toward the universal repeal of blasphemy, apostasy, and other laws that similarly impede freedoms of expression and religion or belief in a way which is inconsistent with international law. We remain committed to working with partners to help tackle problems like discrimination and violence based on religious intolerance in ways that do not interfere with fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religion and freedom of expression.

**Co-Signatories:**Armenia, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Israel, Kosovo, Oman, Poland, Sri Lanka, United Kingdom, United States of America

Tags

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and LaborDemocracyHuman RightsHuman Rights and DemocracyMinisterial to Advance Religious FreedomOffice of International Religious FreedomReligious Freedom

Back to Top
**Exhibit 12.1**

**COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES**

| ** **                                       | ** ** | **2006**   | ** ** | **2005**   | ** ** | **2004**   | ** ** | **2003**   | ** ** | **2002**   | ** ** |
|--------------------------------------------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|------------|
| Pre-tax  income—continuing operations       |       | $          | 93,756     |       | $          | 66,383     |       | $          | 77,458     |       | $          | 51,597 |   | $ | 28,773 |   |
| Pre-tax  income—discontinued operations     |       | 15,995     |       | 15,583     |       | 19,010     |       | 14,882     |       | 15,257     |       |
| Pre-tax gain on  sale of discontinued operations |       | 77,777     |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |       |
| **Total  pre-tax income**                        |       | $          | 187,528    |       | $          | 81,966     |       | $          | 96,468     |       | $          | 66,479 |   | $ | 44,030 |   |
| **Fixed charges**                                | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** |
| Interest expense                                 |       | $          | 12,821     |       | $          | 10,983     |       | $          | 7,903      |       | $          | 4,894 |   | $ | 3,095 |   |
| Amortization of  debt costs                      |       | 917        |       | 897        |       | 727        |       | 2,248      |       | 539        |       |
| Imputed interest  on rent expense                |       | 1,391      |       | 1,391      |       | 867        |       | 633        |       | 567        |       |
| Interest credited to contractholders             |       | 18,346     |       | 19,069     |       | $          | 18,617     |       | $          | 14,900     |       | $ | 10,963 |   |
| Total fixed charges                              |       | $          | 33,475     |       | $          | 32,340     |       | $          | 28,114     |       | $          | 22,675 |   | $ | 15,164 |   |
| **Computation**                                  | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** | ** ** |
| Total earnings  and fixed charges                |       | $          | 221,003    |       | $          | 114,306    |       | $          | 124,582    |       | $          | 89,154 |   | $ | 59,194 |   |
| Ratio of earnings to  fixed charges              |       | 6.60       |       | 3.53       |       | 4.43       |       | 3.93       |       | 3.90       |       |

 

----
#### HERTZ COMMERCIAL LEASING CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, Appellant, v. Rudolph Winfield SEEBECK, d/b/a Whitey Seebeck Standard Service, Appellee.

No. 80-597.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

June 24, 1981.

*1111Aaron Goldman, Ocala, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

ORFINGER, Judge.

Appellant filed an action against appellee claiming damages by virtue of the breach of an equipment lease. Appellee’s answer admitted the execution of the lease, but denied the breach. Appellee also affirmatively pleaded (a) termination by mutual consent; (b) release; (c) waiver; and (d) lach-es. Appellant filed no reply to the affirmative defenses, and noticed the case for trial.

On the day set for trial, appellee moved ore tenus for a judgment on the pleadings and the subsequent orders entered by the court granting the motion make it appear that the motion was granted because of the failure of appellant to reply to the affirmative defenses. We have not been favored by a brief of appellee, so we have nothing to dispel this very plausible interpretation of the court’s order.

It was error for the trial court to grant a judgment on the pleadings for the defendant because plaintiff had not replied to the affirmative defenses. A reply is not required to merely deny an affirmative defense. An automatic denial of every allegation of an affirmative defense is provided by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.110(e). *Moore Meats, Inc. v. Strawn,*313 So.2d 660 (Fla.1975); *Equibank, N.A. v. Penland,*344 So.2d 629 (Fla.1st DCA 1977); *Miller v. Smith,*341 So.2d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). Under Rule 1.100(a) a reply is required only if the pleader wishes to *avoid*the affirmative defense.

> A reply is activated only by an affirmative defense that can be avoided. Stated differently, a reply pleads an affirmative defense to an affirmative defense.

Trawick, *Florida Practice and Procedure,*section 11-6 (1979).

Having determined that the entry of a judgment on the pleadings was erroneous, we find it unnecessary to discuss appellant’s other point on appeal. The final judgment for defendant is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent herewith.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

DAUKSCH, C. J., and FRANK D. UP-CHURCH, Jr., J., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         I, Craig A. McCollam, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the
Annual Report of Dionex Corporation on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30,
2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual
Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Dionex Corporation.

By:    /s/ Craig A. McCollam
       --------------------------------
Name:  Craig A. McCollam
Title: Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Date:  September 19, 2003
****

This chart presents 1996 Mississippi exports to the New Independent States of the former SovietUnion.  Data used to create the chart were collected by the **Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce**, With further analysis by the **University of Massachusetts,Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research** (MISER).  For more informationcall Pat Sweeney at **BISNIS**, at (202)482-4655x20.
'95 export data for Mississippi
Return to USA Export Map
Return to BISNIS Home Page
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Freddie BUTLER and James Batiste.

No. 62502.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 5, 1979.

Frank De Salvo, Robert Barnard, New Orleans, Orleans Indigent Defender Program for James Batiste.

Archie C. Tatford, Jr., New Orleans, for Freddie Butler.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harry F. Con-nick, Dist. Atty., Lindsay A. Larson, Asst. Dist. Atty., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.*

Defendants Freddie Butler and James Batiste were charged by bill of information with armed robbery in violation of R.S. 14:64. Before trial, the state’s motion to sever was granted and defendants were tried separately. Both Butler and Batiste were found guilty as charged and were sentenced under R.S. 15:529.1 as multiple offenders to serve 198 years at hard labor. Although defendants were tried separately, for purposes of this appeal the cases were assigned a single number and treated in effect as consolidated cases here. On his appeal Butler relies on seven assignments of error while Batiste relies on five assignments.

Defendants entered the Kelly Springfield Tire Company located at 3138 South Car-rollton Avenue on • January 11, 1977 and walked around the store for a while prior to arming themselves and robbing the store. Over half a dozen people were in the store at the time of the robbery, several of them entering while the offense was in progress. Defendants obtained money, filed everyone in the store into a washroom and drove away. An employee with the tire company chased defendants for a half hour and obtained their license plate number.

We find that none of the defendants’ assignments of error present reversible error, nor do any involve legal issues not governed by clearly applicable principles of law. 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 to be published in the Southern Reporter.

*Decree*

Accordingly, the convictions and sentences of defendants Butler and Batiste are affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

SUMMERS, C. J., concurs.

*

 Chief Judge L. Julian Samuel participated in this decision as Associate Justice Ad Hoc sitting in the place of Chief Justice Sanders, retired.
Editorial Note on Part 457
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 457 appear at 75 FR 48852, Aug. 11, 2010 and 77 FR 17213, 2013.

§ 457.40 State program administration. ( a ) *Program operation.* The State must implement its program in accordance with the approved State plan, any approved State plan amendments, the requirements of title XXI and title XIX (as appropriate), and the requirements in this chapter. CMS monitors the operation of the approved State plan and plan amendments to ensure compliance with the requirements of title XXI, title XIX (as appropriate) and this chapter.
( b ) *State authority to submit State plan.* A State plan or plan amendment must be signed by the State Governor, or signed by an individual who has been delegated authority by the Governor to submit it.
( c ) *State program officials.* The State must identify in the State plan or State plan amendment, by position or title, the State officials who are responsible for program administration and financial oversight.
( d ) *State legislative authority.* The State plan must include an assurance that the State will not claim expenditures for child health assistance prior to the time that the State has legislative authority to operate the State plan or plan amendment as approved by CMS.
HomeWanted: Narcotics Rewards Program Targets...Julio Marin Gonzalez (Captured)

# 									Julio Marin Gonzalez (Captured)							

Narcotics Rewards Program: Wanted

April 14, 2023

U.S. Actions Targeting Transnational Criminals for Illicit Fentanyl Activity – United States Department of State

Julio Marin Gonzalez is a money launderer for the Sinaloa Cartel who is responsible for facilitating the movement of fentanyl proceeds from the U.S. to Mexico through various means.  In the case of Marin Gonzalez, fentanyl proceeds are laundered through a trade-based scheme using multiple Marin Gonzalez-owned cellphone stores in Sinaloa.

In addition to money laundering, Julio Marin Gonzalez also distributes fentanyl sourced from the Carte in exchange for money used to buy cellphones smuggled into Mexico.  In October 2022 Marin Gonzalez facilitated the sale of approximately 20,000 fentanyl pills manufactured by the cartel in exchange for approximately $14,500.  Roughly November 2022, in Los Angeles, Marin Gonzalez facilitated the sale of approximately five kilograms of fentanyl powder manufactured by the cartel in exchange for approximately $65,000.  The fentanyl was subsequently seized by the DEA.  On March 17, 2023, Marin was arrested on a sealed criminal complaint upon arrival of a flight to White Plains, New York, from Los Angeles, California, and charged with crimes for which he was indicted 18 days later.

On April 4, 2023, a federal grand jury sitting in the Southern District of New York returned an indictment against Julio Marin Gonzalez and others charging them with engaging in a Fentanyl Importation Conspiracy, Fentanyl Trafficking Conspiracy, Possession of Machineguns & Destructive Devices, Conspiracy to Possess Machineguns & Destructive Devices, and Money Laundering Conspiracy.

The U.S. Department of State is offering a **REWARD OF UP TO $1 MILLION** for information leading to the conviction of Julio Marin Gonzalez.

If you have information, please contact the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration via email at ChapitosTips@dea.gov.  If you are located outside of the U.S., you may also visit the nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate.  If in the U.S., you can contact the local DEA office in your city.

**ALL IDENTITIES ARE KEPT STRICTLY CONFIDENTIAL.**

Government officials and employees are not eligible for rewards.

Tags

Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement AffairsDrug TraffickingMexico

Back to Top