alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPublic Schedule...Public Schedule – October 13, 2023

# 									Public Schedule – October 13, 2023							

Public Schedule

Office of the Spokesperson

October 12, 2023

*****THE DAILY PUBLIC SCHEDULE IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE*****

**SECRETARY ANTONY J. BLINKEN****

Secretary Blinken is on travel to Israel, Jordan, Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt from October 11-15, 2023.

**9:45 a.m. LOCAL**Secretary Blinken meets with Jordanian King Abdullah II in Amman, Jordan.**(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)**

**10:45 a.m. LOCAL**Secretary Blinken meets with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in Amman, Jordan.**(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)**

**4:40 p.m. LOCAL**Secretary Blinken meets with Qatari Amir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani in Doha, Qatar.**(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)**

**5:30 p.m. LOCAL**Secretary Blinken meets with Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani in Doha, Qatar.**(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)**

**6:30 p.m. LOCAL** Secretary Blinken holds a joint press availability with Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani in Doha, Qatar.**(OPEN PRESS COVERAGE)**

**9:15 p.m. LOCAL**Secretary Blinken meets with Bahraini Prime Minister Crown Prince Salman bin Hamed Al Khalifa in Manama, Bahrain.**(POOLED CAMERA SPRAY AT TOP)**

**DEPUTY SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES RICHARD R. VERMA**

Deputy Secretary Verma attends meetings and briefings at the Department of State.

**ACTING DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE VICTORIA J. NULAND**

Acting Deputy Secretary Nuland attends meetings and briefings at the Department of State.

**UNDER SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS ELIZABETH ALLEN**

Under Secretary Allen is on travel to Fiji, Vanuatu, Australia, and Chile from October 11-19, 2023.

**ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AFFAIRS TODD D. ROBINSON**

Assistant Secretary Robinson is on travel to California from October 12-15, 2023.

**ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POPULATION, REFUGEES, AND MIGRATION JULIETA VALLS NOYES**

Assistant Secretary Noyes is on travel to Switzerland, Türkiye, and Croatia from October 8-18, 2023.

**BRIEFING SCHEDULE**

 

No Department Press Briefing.

Tags

Office of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

PHIL BRYANT GOVERNOR MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALI1Y

G ARY C. RIKARD, ExECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Ms. Heather McTeer Toney Regional Administrator

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

61 Forsyth Street, S.W. Atlanta , Georgia 30303-3104

Dear Ms. Toney: .... January 14, 2015 Re: SIP Revision for Air QualityNonattainment Areas including DeSoto

County, Mississippi

Enclosed are documents related to a revision to the Mississippi State Implementation P. lan for the

Control of Air Pollution (SIP Revision) and adoption of new state air pollution control regulations.

On November 20, 2014, the Mississippi Commission on Environmental Quality adopted a SIP

Revision which includes new air pollution control regulations specifically for the purposes of

implementing federal requirements for areas designated as non-attainment for National Ambient Air

Quality Standards (NAAQS). The new air pollution control regulations are entitled 11 Mississippi

Administrative Code, Part 2, Chapter 11, "Regulations for Ambient Air Quality Non-Attainment

Areas". The regulations became state effective on December 22, 2014. The regulations are

applicable to sources in DeSoto County, Mississippi as well as any other areas in Mississippi that

may be designated non-attainment for air quality in the future. The SIP Revision also addresses

Emissions Statements and the required Emissions Inventory for DeSoto County, Mississippi.

We are transmitting, under separate cover, additional copies toR. Scott Davis of your agency.

We certify that this SIP revision has been completed in accordance with the Mississippi

Administrative Procedures Act and the Mississippi Pollution Control Law. We further certify that a

public hearing was held on October 2

, 2014 to receive comments regarding the SIP Revision.

OFFICE OF POLLUTION CONTROL

POST OFFICE BOX 2261 • jACKSON, MISSISSIPPI 39225-2261• TEL: (601) 961-5171 • FAX: (601) 354-6612 • www.deq.state.ms.us

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYERMs.HeatherMcTeerToneyJanuary14,2015Page2WefeelthatthisSIPrevisionsubmittalcomplete.Therefore,wearerequestingparallelprocessingbyEPAinordertoexpediteapprovalof'theSIPrevisionandstateairpollutioncontrolregulationsintothefederallyapprovedMississippiStateImplementationPlan.Ifyouhaveanyquestions,pleaseadvise.cc:BeverlyBanister,EPARegionIVMr.R.ScottDavis,EPARegionIVEnclosuresVerytrulyyours,
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,995
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,525
<ALLOWANCES>                                       375
<INVENTORY>                                      9,626
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                40,547
<PP&E>                                          24,110
<DEPRECIATION>                                     625
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  87,217
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           19,625
<BONDS>                                          5,275
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            84
<OTHER-SE>                                      58,113
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    87,217
<SALES>                                         35,653
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                35,653
<CGS>                                           12,622
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,850
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 194
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,609
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,075
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,534
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,534
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .40


</TABLE>
<PAGE>




EXHIBIT 32.2


                          CFO CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 (as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of
Peoples Educational Holdings, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certify that the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
SEC or its staff upon request.





Date:  November 12, 2003                    /s/ Michael L. DeMarco
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Michael L. DeMarco,
                                            Chief Financial Officer
****

----

| **Secondary MarketReport** | **March1998**
TABLE 6 Average InterestRate for Home Construction Financing **HUD/FHA *              CONVENTIONAL                ----------------------    ----------------------                Mar'98  Feb'98  Mar '97   Mar'98  Feb'98  Mar'97                ----------------------    ----------------------Northeast        7.95%   8.30%   8.54%     7.95%   8.40%   8.35%Middle Atlantic  7.58%   7.50%   8.25%     7.42%   7.78%   8.30%Southeast        8.81%   8.80%   8.95%     8.95%   8.98%   8.95%North Central    7.84%   7.79%   8.63%     7.92%   7.81%   8.58%Southwest        8.55%   9.00%   8.81%     8.33%   8.59%   8.78%West             8.64%   8.74%   9.09%     8.63%   8.49%   9.00%United States    8.28%   8.40%   8.76%     8.32%   8.40%   8.71%* Type of financing planned for permanent loans.****************************************************************TABLE 7 National Percent of HUD Offices Reporting AdequateConstruction Funds Available for Homes**Mar'98          Feb'98            Mar'97                ------          ------            ------FHA-Insured        98%             98%               97%Conventional       98%             97%               98%
These data are not based on actual transactions.  They arecompiled from the best information available to HUD FieldOffices throughout the US.  Data as of: Mar 1, 1998                      HFEP: 3-01-98***HSG/FHA Home Page | Reports Menu | Email Us******* |
|----------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
#### § 64.9 Other HHS regulations that apply.

Several other regulations apply to grants under this part. These include, but are not necessarily limited to:

42 CFR part 50, subpart D—Public Health Service grant appeals procedure.

45 CFR part 16—Procedures of the Departmental Grant Appeals Board.

45 CFR part 75—Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for HHS Awards.

45 CFR part 76—subparts A-F.

Governmentwide debarment and suspension (nonprocurement) and requirements for drug-free workplace (grants).

45 CFR part 80—Nondiscrimination under programs receiving Federal assistance through the Department of Health and Human Services—effectuation of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

45 CFR part 81—Practice and procedure for hearings under 45 CFR part 80 of this title.

45 CFR part 84—Nondiscrimination on the basis of handicap in programs and activities receiving or benefiting from Federal financial assistance.

45 CFR part 86—Nondiscrimination on the basis of sex in education programs and activities receiving or benefiting from Federal financial assistance.

45 CFR part 91—Nondiscrimination on the basis of age in HHS programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance.

[56 FR 29192, June 26, 1991, as amended at 81 FR 3009, Jan. 20, 2016]
41375.

#### FINGER v. THE STATE. LONG v. THE STATE.

41376.

Pannell, Judge.

1. Where the prosecutor is the father-in-law of a person to whom a juror is related in the fifth degree under the civil law, such juror is not disqualified under the Act of 1935, approved March 28, 1935 (Ga. L. 1935, p. 396; *Code Ann.*§ 59-716), which provides that a juror “related by-consanguinity or affinity to any party interested in the result of the case . . . within the sixth degree,” shall be disqualified to act, this for the reason that while the daughter-in-law of the prosecutor is related to the prosecutor by affinity, this does not make the relatives of the daughter-in-law relatives of the father-in-law. *Burns v. State,*89 Ga. 527 (15 SE 748); *Central R.*&c. *Co. v. Roberts,*91 Ga. 513 (18 SE 315); *Edge v. Calhoun National Bank,*155 Ga. 821 (3) (118 SE 359).

2. While the fact that one of the jurors, upon the joint trial of two defendants jointly indicted for the offense of assault with intent to murder, was, unknown to the defendants, related in the fifth degree to the wife of one defendant, would disqualify the juror (Ga. L. 1935, p. 396; *Code Ann.*§ 59-716), it would not be grounds for reversing the conviction on such charge of the defendant to whom the juror was related *(Downing v. State,*114 Ga. 30 (1) (39 SE 927)) for the reason that the relationship would be presumed to be favorable to that defendant *(Wright v. Smith,*104 Ga. 174 (30 SE 651); *Parker v. State,*146 Ga. 131, 132 (90 SE 859)); yet, it is apparent that such presumption of favor did not exist as to the other defendant, and a juror not qualified to serve, having served, would be grounds for voiding the trial, even though the latter defendant complaining be convicted for the lesser offense of assault and battery.

3. Whether the beating of the prosecutor with a shotgun and jumping on him and stomping him with feet was done with a weapon likely to produce death was, under the facts of this case, a matter for the jury. *Prior v. State,*41 Ga. 155.

4. The evidence was sufficient to authorize the verdict of the jury in each case.

*The judgment of the trial court in overruling the motion for new trial in Case No. 4-1376 is affirmed. Judgment reversed in Case No. 41375.*

*Nichols, P. J., and Eberhardt, J., concur.*

*189Submitted June 8, 1965

Decided September 8, 1965.

*Wyatt*cfc *Wyatt, L. N. Wyatt,*for Finger.

*George H. Carley, Wyatt & Wyatt,*for Long.

*Wright Lipford, Solicitor General,*contra.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2011 

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 

at 100 East 8th Avenue in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, as the ‘‘George Howard, Jr. Federal Building and United States Courthouse’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 24, 2007 

Mr. ROSS (for himself, Mr. BERRY, Mr. SNYDER, and Mr. BOOZMAN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located at 100 East 8th Avenue in Pine Bluff, 

Arkansas, as the ‘‘George Howard, Jr. Federal Building 

and United States Courthouse’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. GEORGE HOWARD, JR. FEDERAL BUILDING 

4 AND UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The Federal building and United 

6 States courthouse located at 100 East 8th Avenue in Pine 

7 Bluff, Arkansas, shall be known and designated as the 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•HR 2011 IH

1 ‘‘George Howard, Jr. Federal Building and United States 

2 Courthouse’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the Federal building and United States court6 house referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be 

7 a reference to the ‘‘George Howard, Jr. Federal Building 

8 and United States Courthouse’’. 

Æ 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Article 5 Fin. Data Schedule for 3rd Qtr 10-QSB
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             	                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   	                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>			           JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                                       SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                                              7830
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                           1003982
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                              1129124
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     2371748
<PP&E>                                                         1443448
<DEPRECIATION>                                         1196745
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          3177751
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              1704664
<BONDS>                                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                      40852
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                                   857537
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               3177751
<SALES>                                                        3348266
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    3348266
<CGS>                                                            2086756
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            2086756
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                    135400
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       (153883)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (153883)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                             (153883)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                  (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                   (.04)
        

</TABLE>
41475.

#### ST. PAUL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY et al. v. DILLINGHAM.

*423Argued September 7, 1965

Decided September 23, 1965

Rehearing denied October 6, 1965.

*424*Oliver & Maner, Joseph M. Oliver, T. S. Gray,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Dawson & Phillips, R. L. Dawson, Richard D. Phillips,*contra.

Dhbn, Judge.

No question of comparative or contributory negligence enters into this award. The sums found for future pain and suffering are to be determined by the enlightened conscience of impartial jurors, and are not to be reduced to present cash value. *Bagley v. Akins,*110 Ga. App. 338 (138 SE2d 430). “As we understand the law as to excessive verdicts, a verdict will not be set aside as excessive by this court unless it manifestly appears from the record that it was a result of prejudice, bias, or gross mistake.” *Colonial Stores, Inc. v. Coker,*77 Ga. App. 227 (9) (48 SE2d 150). “Before the verdict will be set aside on the ground that it is excessive, where there is no direct proof of prejudice or bias, the amount thereof, when considered in connection with all the facts, must shock the moral sense, appear ‘exhorbitant,’ ‘flagrantly outrageous,’ and ‘extravagant’ ... It must carry its death warrant upon its face.” *Western & A. R. v. Burnett,*79 Ga. App. 530, 543 (54 SE2d 357), citing *Realty Bond &c. Co. v. Harley,*19 Ga. App. 186, 187 (91 SE 254). While it was stated in *Seaboard Air-Line R. v. Miller,*5 Ga. App. 402 (63 SE 299) that the inference of bias or gross mistake which under *Code*§ 105-2015 must appear before any court is authorized to set aside a verdict for excessiveness may arise from its size alone, through comparison with like cases and other verdicts, the comparison is difficult because no two cases are precisely alike. The student of verdict size may find examples to his heart’s content collected in 16 ALR2d, Anno., pp. 3-389. Nonpecuniary damages generally *425falling under the category of pain and suffering range at least up to $134,000 in cases where earning capacity has not been destroyed. See Seffert v. Los Angeles Transit Lines, 56 Cal.2d 498 (364 P2d 337). An excessive or inadequate verdict constitutes a mistake of fact rather than of law. It addresses itself to the discretion of the trial judge who saw the witnesses and heard the testimony. This court is a court for the correction of errors of law only, and this court’s jurisdiction is confined to the question of whether the trial court abused his discretion in overruling the motion for a new trial on this ground. See also *Seaboard Air Line R. Co. v. Vaughn,*19 Ga. App. 397 (3) (91 SE 516) followed in *Wilson v. Dunaway,*112 Ga. App. 241, (144 SE2d 514). In the present case, where the evidence most favorable to the plaintiff shows painful and permanent injuries with loss of physical function, it cannot be said that the verdict is excessive as a matter of law.

The trial court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Felton, C. J., and Jordan, J., concur.*