alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NO. 07-03-0344-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

SEPTEMBER 3, 2003

______________________________

PATRICK LEE MULLINS

Appellant

v.

GIB LEWIS EXTENSION CELL BLOCK, ET AL.

Appellees

_________________________________

FROM THE 1-A DISTRICT COURT OF TYLER COUNTY;

NO. 18,549; HON. MONTE D. LAWLIS, PRESIDING

_______________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

_______________________________

Before QUINN, REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

Appellant Patrick Lee Mullins filed a notice of appeal on July 3, 2003. However, he

did not pay the $125 filing fee required from appellants under Texas Rule of Appellate

Procedure 5. Nor did he file an affidavit of indigence per Texas Rule of Appellate

Procedure 20.1. By letter from this Court dated August 19, 2003, we informed appellant

that “[u]nless the filing fee in the amount of $125.00 is paid by Monday, September 01,

2003, the appeal will be subject to dismissal.” TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c); see Holt v. F. F.
2

Enterprises, 990 S.W.2d 756 (Tex. App.--Amarillo 1998, pet. ref’d). The deadline lapsed,

and the fee was not received. Instead, Mullins sent a letter explaining that he proceeded

as an indigent in the trial court and did not believe he had to again illustrate his purported

indigence on appeal. Accompanying his missive was neither a motion for leave to file a

belated affidavit of indigency or an affidavit of indigency as contemplated by Rule 20.1(b)

of the appellate rules. 

That an appellant illustrated himself to be an indigent at trial does not ipso facto

entitle him to the same status on appeal. He must again prove that he lacks the economic

means to pay applicable court costs. Holt v. F. F. Enterprises, 990 S.W.2d at 758-59.

Mullins did not do this on or before filing his notice of appeal, as mandated by rule of

procedure. TEX. R. APP. P. 20.1(c)(1). Nor did he move the court for an extension of the

deadline per appellate rule 20.1(c)(3) or present evidence of his alleged status as a

pauper at any time after filing his notice of appeal. Thus, he has not shown himself

entitled to proceed as an indigent. 

Because Mullins has failed to pay the requisite filing fee as directed by the court,

we dismiss the appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3(c). 

 

Per Curiam
#### Benjamin F. Watkins, Respondent, *v.*Augustus W. Peters, Appellant.

Appeal from order of the Special Term granting leave to serve an amended answer upon terms. /

J. W. and C. W. Ridgway (C. W. Ridgway, of counsel), for appellant.

Harrison & Byrd (R. W. B. Elliott and Robert L. Harrison, of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

Order appealed from affirmed, with costs. ’

Present: McCarthy and O’Dwyer, JJ.

Order affirmed, with costs.
# Tanzania

100 items

        -    Report  		Tanzania	  July 19, 2018 
        -    Report  		Tanzania	  June 28, 2018 
        -    Report  		Tanzania	  May 29, 2018 
        -    Report  		Tanzania	  April 20, 2018 
        -    		Bukoba Combination Prevention Evaluation: Effective Approaches to Linking People Living with HIV to Care and Treatment Services in Tanzania	  February 7, 2018 
        -    		Ariel Adherence Clubs: Increasing Retention in Care and Adherence to Life-Saving Antiretroviral Therapy among Children and Adolescents Living with HIV in Tanzania	  February 7, 2018 
        -    Air Transport Agreement  		U.S.-Tanzania Air Transport Agreement Amendment of December 7, 2017	  December 7, 2017 
        -    Report  		2017 END Wildlife Trafficking Report	  November 16, 2017 
        -    Report  		Tanzania	  August 15, 2017 
        -    Report  		Tanzania	  June 29, 2017 

previous page1…678910next page

Back to Top
§ 433.50 Basis, scope, and applicability. ( a ) *Basis.* This subpart interprets and implements— ( 1 ) Section 1902(a)(2) of the Act which requires States to share in the cost of medical assistance expenditures and permit both State and local governments to participate in the financing of the non-Federal portion of medical assistance expenditures.
( 2 ) Section 1903(a) of the Act, which requires the Secretary to pay each State an amount equal to the Federal medical assistance percentage of the total amount expended as medical assistance under the State's plan.
( 3 ) Section 1903(w) of the Act, which specifies the treatment of revenues from provider-related donations and health care-related taxes in determining a State's medical assistance expenditures for which Federal financial participation (FFP) is available under the Medicaid program.
( b ) *Scope.* This subpart— ( 1 ) Specifies State plan requirements for State financial participation in expenditures for medical assistance.
( 2 ) Defines provider-related donations and health care-related taxes that may be received without a reduction in FFP.
( 3 ) Specifies rules for revenues received from provider-related donations and health care-related taxes during a transition period.
( 4 ) Establishes limitations on FFP when States receive funds from provider-related donations and revenues generated by health care-related taxes.
( c ) *Applicability.* The provisions of this subpart apply to the 50 States and the District of Columbia, but not to any State whose entire Medicaid program is operated under a waiver granted under section 1115 of the Act.
[57 FR 55138, Nov. 24, 1992; 58 FR 6095, Jan. 26, 1993; 72 FR 29832, May 29, 2007; 72 FR 29832, May 29, 2007; 75 FR 73975, Nov. 30, 2010]
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-2149

In Re: MARINE ENERGY SYSTEMS

CORPORATION, A South Carolina

Corporation,

 Debtor.

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

GENERAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

versus

WILLIAM J. GILLIAM,

Defendant - Appellant,

versus

CBS CORPORATION, formerly known as

Viacom Inc.; SIEMENS POWER

GENERATION, INC., formerly known as

Siemens Westinghouse Power Corp., 

Third Party Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge.

(2:05-cv-02510-DCN; 97-bk-01929-JW; 04-bk-80020-JW)

Submitted: August 17, 2007 Decided: September 6, 2007

Before MICHAEL, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
- 2 -

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Wyatt B. Durrette, Jr., Christine A. Williams, DURRETTEBRADSHAW

PLC, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Henry E. Grimball, BUIST

MOORE SMYTHE MCGEE, PA, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

William J. Gilliam appeals from the district court’s

order affirming the bankruptcy court’s orders denying his motion

for a continuance of the summary judgment hearing and granting

summary judgment in favor of the Third-Party Defendants on

Gilliam’s third-party claims against them. We have reviewed the

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for

the reasons stated by the district court. General Dynamics Corp.

v. Gilliam, Nos. 2:05-cv-02510-DCN; 97-bk-01929-JW; 04-bk-80020-JW

(D.S.C. Sept. 28, 2006). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Lesotho National Day

# 									Lesotho National Day							

Press Statement

Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of State

October 4, 2021

On behalf of the United States of America, I am pleased to send congratulations to the people of the Kingdom of Lesotho as you commemorate your 55th Independence Day.

Lesotho and the United States enjoy a longstanding friendship rooted in democratic principles and respect for the rule of law.  Our strong health partnership has underpinned our shared fight against HIV/AIDS and the global COVID-19 pandemic.  We look forward to continuing our work together to counter trafficking in persons, increase economic and commercial ties, and strengthen democratic governance.

Best wishes to all on this day of celebration.

Tags

Bureau of African AffairsLesothoOffice of the SpokespersonPartnershipsThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Georgia’s Western Trajectory at Risk

# 									Georgia’s Western Trajectory at Risk							

Press Statement

Matthew Miller, Department Spokesperson

May 1, 2024

The United States condemns the Kremlin-inspired “foreign influence” legislation advanced in Georgia’s parliament earlier today and the false narrative government officials have adopted to defend it.  Members of the ruling party have been clear that the intent of the law is to silence critical voices and destroy Georgia’s vibrant civil society, which serves as a critical check on government in any democratic nation.

This legislation and Georgian Dream’s anti-Western rhetoric put Georgia on a precarious trajectory.  The statements and actions of the Georgian government are incompatible with the democratic values that underpin membership in the EU and NATO and thus jeopardize Georgia’s path to Euro-Atlantic integration.  Comments mischaracterizing foreign assistance in Georgia – which we have provided for 32 years to strengthen Georgia’s economy, democracy, and ability to deter Russian aggression – fundamentally undermine the strong relationship we have developed with the government and people of Georgia.

We stand with the Georgian people and their right to have their voices heard.  We condemn the use of violence against peaceful protests, including against journalists covering the demonstrations.  Use of force to suppress peaceful assembly and freedom of speech is unacceptable, and we urge authorities to allow non-violent protesters to continue to exercise their right to freedom of expression.

Tags

Bureau of European and Eurasian AffairsDemocracyEconomic AffairsGeorgiaOffice of the Spokesperson

Back to Top
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsMEGA16 - Computer program for analysis and extrapolation of stress-rupture dataThe computerized form of the minimum commitment method of interpolating and extrapolating stress versus time to failure data, MEGA16, is described. Examples are given of its many plots and tabular outputs for a typical set of data. The program assumes a specific model equation and then provides a family of predicted isothermals for any set of data with at least 12 stress-rupture results from three different temperatures spread over reasonable stress and time ranges. It is written in FORTRAN 4 using IBM plotting subroutines and its runs on an IBM 370 time sharing system.Document ID19810014953Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Publication (TP)AuthorsEnsign, C. R.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 4, 2013Publication DateMay 1, 1981Subject CategoryStructural MechanicsReport/Patent NumberE-495NASA-TP-1809Accession Number81N23486Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19810014953.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
§ 488.434 Civil money penalties: Notice of penalty. Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 64163 , Aug. 6, 2024.
( a ) *CMS notice of penalty.* ( 1 ) CMS sends a written notice of the penalty to the facility for all facilities except non-State operated NFs when the State is imposing the penalty.
( 2 ) *Content of notice.* The notice that CMS sends includes— ( i ) The nature of the noncompliance;
( ii ) The statutory basis for the penalty;
( iii ) The amount of penalty per day of noncompliance or the amount of the penalty per instance of noncompliance;
( iv ) Any factors specified in § 488.438(f) that were considered when determining the amount of the penalty;
( v ) The date of the instance of noncompliance or the date on which the penalty begins to accrue;
( vi ) When the penalty stops accruing, if applicable;
( vii ) When the penalty is collected; and
( viii ) Instructions for responding to the notice, including a statement of the facility's right to a hearing, and the implication of waiving a hearing, as provided in § 488.436.
( b ) *State notice of penalty.* ( 1 ) The State must notify the facility in accordance with State procedures for all non-State operated NFs when the State takes the action.
( 2 ) The State's notice must— ( i ) Be in writing; and
( ii ) Include, at a minimum, the information specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
[59 FR 56243, Nov. 10, 1994; 60 FR 50119, Sept. 28, 1995, as amended at 64 FR 13360, Mar. 18, 1999]
#### § 456.151 Definitions.

As used in this subpart:

*Medical care appraisal norms* or *norms* means numerical or statistical measures of usually observed performance.

*Medical care criteria* or *criteria* means predetermined elements against which aspects of the quality of a medical service may be compared. These criteria are developed by health professionals relying on their expertise and the professional health care literature.
HomePeople...Baxter Hunt

# 				Baxter Hunt			

															Acting Dean, School of Professional and Area Studies (SPAS) 						Foreign Service Institute												

				January 20, 2021 -									June 24, 2022							

**Baxter Hunt's term ended on June 24, 2022.** Baxter Hunt, a career diplomat in the Senior Foreign Service, is Acting Dean in the School of Professional and Area Studies at the Foreign Service Institute. From January 2019 through August 2020, he was Chargé d’Affaires of the United States Embassy in Santiago, Chile. He had served as Deputy Chief of Mission of the embassy starting in August 2017. Prior to his assignment in Chile, he served as Deputy Executive Secretary in the Office of the Secretary of State from 2015 until 2017.Mr. Hunt’s overseas appointments include two tours at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, where he was director of the Office of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement from 2013 until 2014. He also served at the U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, Canada; at the U.S. Consulate General in Durban, South Africa; and at the U.S. Embassy in Warsaw, Poland.In Washington, DC, Mr. Hunt has served in the Office of European and Eurasian Affairs as Director of the Office of Ukraine / Moldova / Belarus Affairs and Director of the Office of Caucasus Affairs and Regional Conflicts. He also served in the Office of Population, Refugees, and Migration Affairs as Director for Assistance to Europe, Central Asia, and the Americas. Mr. Hunt was special Assistant to Under Secretaries of State for Political Affairs Marc Grossman and Nicholas Burns. Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Mr. Hunt was a Presidential Management Fellow in the Department of State, the Department of Defense, and the National Security Council.Mr. Hunt holds a master’s degree in public administration from Princeton University, and a bachelor’s degree from the University of North Carolina.
Tags
Foreign Service InstituteState Department OfficialBack to Top- White House
- USA.gov
- Office of the Inspector General
- Archives
- Contact Us
follow usFacebookXInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery- Privacy Policy
- Accessibility Statement
- Copyright Information
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
U.S. Department *of* StateThe Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
# C_2006131EN.01005402.xml

| 3.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/54

---

Action brought on 13 April 2006 — Sundholm v Commission

(Case F-42/06)

(2006/C 131/99)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant(s): Asa Sundholm (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: S. Orlandi, A. Coolen, J.-N. Louis and E. Marchal, avocats)

Applicant(s):

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Declare illegal Article 12 of the Commission Decision of 3 March 2004 on the general provisions for implementing Article 43 of the Staff Regulations (GIP); |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare illegal Article 12 of the Commission Decision of 3 March 2004 on the general provisions for implementing Article 43 of the Staff Regulations (GIP);

| — | Annul the decision establishing the applicant's Career Development Review (CDR) for the period 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2004; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision establishing the applicant's Career Development Review (CDR) for the period 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2004;

| — | Order the defendant to pay, at this stage of the proceedings, EUR 1 in respect of non-pecuniary loss; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay, at this stage of the proceedings, EUR 1 in respect of non-pecuniary loss;

| — | Order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of her action, the applicant submits first of all that the amendments of the GIP infringe the principle of legal certainty and the Official's entitlement to reasonable career prospects, in that the rules for assessing the merits changed in the course of the assessment period.

Next, the applicant alleges an infringement of the GIP and of the duty to state reasons. In particular, notwithstanding the amendment to the applicant's duties and the lack of precise and definitive objectives and assessment criteria, comments from her CDR 2003 were copied into her CDR 2004, without complying with the conditions laid down by the GIP for a carryover.

Lastly, the applicant submits that the contested decision contains a manifest error of assessment and inconsistencies between the marks awarded and the comments.

---
#### § 493.1838 Training and technical assistance for unsuccessful participation in proficiency testing.

If a laboratory's participation in proficiency testing is unsuccessful, CMS may require the laboratory to undertake training of its personnel, or to obtain necessary technical assistance, or both, in order to meet the requirements of the proficiency testing program. This requirement is separate from the principal and alternative sanctions set forth in §§ 493.1806 and 493.1807.
HomeSpace Status Lists...3. Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, done at London, Moscow and Washington March 29, 1972

# 									3. Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, done at London, Moscow and Washington March 29, 1972							

Depositary – Treaty Affairs

Office of Treaty Affairs

Entered into force September 1, 1972.

In accordance with Article XXIV, paragraph 2, the Convention shall be subject to ratification by signatory States and instruments of ratification and instruments of accession shall be deposited with the designated Depositary Governments [Russian Federation, United Kingdom, United States]. In accordance with Article XXIV, paragraph 3, the Agreement entered into force on the deposit of the fifth instrument of ratification. In accordance with Article XXIV, paragraph 4, for States whose instruments of ratification or accession are deposited subsequent to the entry into force of the Convention, it shall enter into force on the date of the deposit of their instruments of ratification or accession.
Download Status List						 [591 KB]

Tags

MultilateralSpaceTreaties

Back to Top
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JOHN HENRY RYSKAMP, 

Petitioner-Appellant, 

 v. 

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL 

REVENUE, 

Respondent-Appellee.

No. 19-72626 

Tax Ct. No. 6595-19 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from a Decision of the

United States Tax Court

Submitted August 5, 2020**

Before: SCHROEDER, HAWKINS, and LEE, Circuit Judges.

John Henry Ryskamp appeals pro se from the Tax Court’s order dismissing 

for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his petition regarding his tax liabilities for tax 

years 2003, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2018. We have jurisdiction under 

26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review de novo the Tax Court’s dismissal for lack of 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

AUG 13 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
 2 19-72626 

subject matter jurisdiction. Gorospe v. Comm’r, 451 F.3d 966, 968 (9th Cir. 

2006). We affirm. 

The Tax Court properly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction over 

Ryskamp’s petition because the Internal Revenue Service’s Notice LT16 that 

formed the basis for Ryskamp’s petition was not a notice of deficiency or a notice 

of determination. See 26 U.S.C. § 6212 (notice of deficiency); 26 U.S.C. § 6330 

(notice of determination); Gorospe, 451 F.3d at 968 (the Tax Court is a court of 

limited jurisdiction, and its subject matter is defined by Tile 26 of the United States 

Code). Contrary to Ryskamp’s contentions, his substantive due process arguments 

do not confer jurisdiction on the Tax Court. 

We reject at unsupported by the record Ryskamp’s contention that the Tax 

Court was biased against him.

The Commissioner’s motion for sanctions in the amount of $8,000 (Docket 

Entry No. 10) is granted. See Fed. R. App. P. 38; Grimes v. Comm’r, 806 F.2d 

1451, 1454 (9th Cir. 1986) (“Sanctions are appropriate when the result of an appeal 

is obvious and the arguments are wholly without merit.”).

AFFIRMED.
****

This chart presents 1996 Utah 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 Utah
Return to USA Export Map
Return to BISNIS Home Page
|   |                         | BISNISHome |  Subscribe | Feedback | Contact Us | Site Map |       |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|        LATEST NEWS COUNTRY REPORTS INDUSTRY REPORTS  LEADS  EVENTSPUBLICATIONSSOURCES OF FINANCECUSTOMS CORNERU.S. STATE EXPORTSUSEFUL LINKS
*BISNIS* the NIS market resource at the USA Trade Center                 |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. §1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In
connection with the Quarterly Report of SpectraScience, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mark McWilliams,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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/
      Mark McWilliamsMark
      McWilliams
              Chief
      Executive Officer
              Date:
      November 15, 2010