alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 202
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 202 appear at 76 FR 27898, May 13, 2011.

§ 202.1 Material not subject to copyright. The following are examples of works not subject to copyright and applications for registration of such works cannot be entertained: ( a ) Words and short phrases such as names, titles, and slogans; familiar symbols or designs; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering or coloring; mere listing of ingredients or contents;
( b ) Ideas, plans, methods, systems, or devices, as distinguished from the particular manner in which they are expressed or described in a writing;
( c ) Blank forms, such as time cards, graph paper, account books, diaries, bank checks, scorecards, address books, report forms, order forms and the like, which are designed for recording information and do not in themselves convey information;
( d ) Works consisting entirely of information that is common property containing no original authorship, such as, for example: Standard calendars, height and weight charts, tape measures and rulers, schedules of sporting events, and lists or tables taken from public documents or other common sources.
( e ) Typeface as typeface.
[24 FR 4956, June 18, 1959, as amended at 38 FR 3045, Feb. 1, 1973; 57 FR 6202, Feb. 21, 1992]
§ 404.1 Scope of part. ( a ) This part prescribes the terms, conditions, and procedures upon which a federally owned invention, other than an invention in the custody of the Tennessee Valley Authority, may be licensed. This part does not affect licenses which: ( 1 ) Were in effect prior to April 7, 2006;
( 2 ) May exist at the time of the Government's acquisition of title to the invention, including those resulting from the allocation of rights to inventions made under Government research and development contracts;
( 3 ) Are the result of an authorized exchange of rights in the settlement of patent disputes, including interferences; or
( 4 ) Are otherwise authorized by law or treaty, including 35 U.S.C. 202(e), 35 U.S.C. 207(a)(3) and 15 U.S.C. 3710a, which also may authorize the assignment of inventions. Although licenses on inventions made under a cooperative research and development agreement (CRADA) are not subject to this regulation, agencies are encouraged to apply the same policies and use similar terms when appropriate. Similarly, this should be done for licenses granted under inventions where the agency has acquired rights pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 207(a)(3).
( b ) Royalties collected pursuant to this part, and used in accordance with 15 U.S.C. 3710c(a)(1)(B), are not intended as an alternative to appropriated funding or as an alternative funding mechanism.
[88 FR 17739, Mar. 24, 2023]
#### § 67.102 Definitions.

*Contract proposal* means a written offer to enter into a contract submitted to a contracting officer by an individual or non-Federal organization, and including at a minimum a description of the nature, purpose, duration, cost of project and methods, personnel, and facilities to be utilized in carrying out the requirements of the contract.

*Peer review group* means a panel of experts, as required by section 922(c) of the PHS Act, established to conduct technical and scientific review of contract proposals and to make recommendations to the Administrator regarding the merits of such proposals.

*Request for proposals* means a Government solicitation to prospective offerors, under procedures for negotiated contracts, to submit a proposal to fulfill specific agency requirements based on terms and conditions defined in the solicitation. The solicitation contains information sufficient to enable all offerors to prepare competitive proposals, and is as complete as possible with respect to: The nature of work to be performed; descriptions and specifications of items to be delivered; performance schedule; special requirements, clauses or other circumstances affecting the contract; and criteria by which the proposals will be evaluated.
§ 82.2 What are the basics of dose reconstruction? The basic principle of dose reconstruction is to characterize the radiation environments to which workers were exposed and to then place each worker in time and space within this exposure environment. Then methods are applied to translate exposure to radiation into quantified radiation doses at the specific organs or tissues relevant to the types of cancer occurring among the workers. A hierarchy of methods is used in a dose reconstruction, depending on the nature of the exposure conditions and the type, quality, and completeness of data available to characterize the environment. ( a ) If found to be complete and adequate, individual worker monitoring data, such as dosimeter readings and bioassay sample results, are given the highest priority in assessing exposure. These monitoring data are interpreted using additional data characterizing the workplace radiation exposures. If radiation exposures in the workplace environment cannot be fully characterized based on available data, default values based on reasonable and scientific assumptions may be used as substitutes. For dose reconstructions conducted in occupational illness compensation programs, this practice may include use of assumptions that represent the worst case conditions. For example, if the solubility classification of an inhaled material can not be determined, the dose reconstruction would use the classification that results in the largest dose to the organ or tissue relevant to the cancer and that is possible given existing knowledge of the material and process.
( b ) If individual monitoring data are not available or adequate, dose reconstructions may use monitoring results for groups of workers with comparable activities and relationships to the radiation environment. Alternatively, workplace area monitoring data may be used to estimate the dose. As with individual worker monitoring data, workplace exposure characteristics are used in combination with workplace monitoring data to estimate dose.
( c ) If neither adequate worker nor workplace monitoring data are available, the dose reconstruction may rely substantially on process description information to analytically develop an exposure model. For internal exposures, this model includes such factors as the quantity and composition of the radioactive substance (the source term), the chemical form, particle size distribution, the level of containment, and the likelihood of dispersion.
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 394/2005

of 8 March 2005         

amending Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of the single payment scheme provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, and derogating from Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations (EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001, (EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) No 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999, (EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71 and (EC) No 2529/2001 (1), and in particular Article 145(c) and (d) and (q) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulation (EC) No 795/2004 is amended as follows:

Article 2

By way of derogation from Article 51 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, Member States may decide for the year 2005 to apply the second subparagraph of Article 51(b) of that Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 864/2004.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall apply from 1 January 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 8 March 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 1. Regulation last amended by Regulation (EC) No 118/2005 (OJ L 24, 27.1.2005, p. 15).

(2)OJ L 141, 30.4.2004, p. 1. Regulation amended by Regulation (EC) No 1974/2004 (OJ L 345, 20.11.2004, p. 85).

(3)OJ L 161, 30.4.2005, p. 48.

----
*Pursuant to 5

TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5

TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-60620

Summary Calendar

PATRICK J. HIGGINS, SR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

GEORGE CHANDLER, Individually and in his Official

Capacity as Assistant Director of the Jackson County

Restitution Center; BECKY FULTON, Individually and

in her Official Capacity as Director of the Jackson

County Restitution Center; CHARLES FAULK, Individually

and in his Official Capacity as a Mississippi Department

of Corrections Correctional Officer,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

(1:97-CV-577-RR)

July 6, 1999

Before POLITZ, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Patrick J. Higgins, a former Mississippi state prisoner, appeals the district

court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to exhaust his prison

administrative remedies. Higgins contends that, although he was incarcerated in

a correctional facility at the time that he suffered the alleged constitutional

violation, he was not a state prisoner because his conviction and sentence had been
 

1

28 U.S.C. § 1997e(a); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(h); Underwood v. Wilson, 151 F.3d 292 (5th

Cir. 1998).

 

2 United States v. Calverley, 37 F.3d 160 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc); Robertson v. Plano

City of Texas, 70 F.3d 21 (5th Cir. 1995).

2

stayed pending an appeal in the case.

Our review of the record and briefs of the parties persuades that we should

affirm. Higgins’ complaint reflects that he was detained in a correctional facility

as a result of a criminal charge at the time that the alleged constitutional violation

occurred. Therefore, Higgins was required to pursue and exhaust his prison

administrative remedies prior to filing a judicial complaint seeking relief under

section 1983.1

Higgins contends for the first time on appeal that he was illegally extradited

from Illinois by Mississippi officials and was held illegally in custody between

June 1994 and August 1998. This claim involves facts that were not alleged in

pleadings before the district court and that have no bearing on Higgins’ section

1983 complaint, and the claim does not rise to the level of plain error.2

The judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.
Severance benefit letter, dated October 7, 2008 (Chris Kiser)



 Exhibit 10.29 
 

 
 October 7, 2008 
 Mr. Chris Kiser 
 Chief Customer Officer 
 Pinnacle
Foods Group 
 2901 Corporate Circle, Suite 300 
 Flower Mound, TX
75028 
 Dear Chris, 
 You recently asked Bill
Toler to consider extending your severance benefits should your position be eliminated or you are terminated for anything other than cause at some future date. While we don’t anticipate that happening, we understand your desire to provide a
higher level of financial security for your family should you find yourself in that circumstance. 
 Based on your proven value to the
organization and in anticipation of your future performance, we are pleased to extend your severance benefits as follows: 
 Paragraph 5 of
your Offer Letter dated December 11, 2003 is deleted and replaced with: If you are terminated for any reason other than good cause, your voluntary resignation, death or disability which continues for more than six (6) months, you will be
eligible to receive nine (9) months salary at your monthly base rate (“Severance Payment”), payable biweekly. Should you remain unemployed following this nine (9) month period, you will be eligible to receive up to a maximum of
three (3) additional months salary at half your monthly base rate (“Additional Severance Payment”)also payable bi-weekly, subject to confirmation that you have not accepted an offer of employment. You will be eligible to be maintained
on Company sponsored Health and Dental plans at your normal bi-weekly rate for the period of your severance or until you have obtained other employment, whichever period is shorter. Payment of any Severance Benefits will only be made following the
Company’s receipt of a fully executed General Release. 
 Chris, we hope you appreciate that this is a significant exception to our
normal policy and will maintain the highest degree of confidentiality in this regard. 
 Sincerely, 
 John L. Butler 
 EVP- Human Resources 
 1 Old Bloomfield Avenue, Mt. Lakes, NJ 07046
§ 56.203 Project elements. A project for planning and developing a migrant health center supported under this subpart must: ( a ) Determine (by survey or other appropriate means) the approximate number of ( 1 ) migratory agricultural workers and the members of their families, and
( 2 ) seasonal agricultural workers and the members of their families, within the proposed catchment area in the calendar year in which the grant is made and the period of time these workers and their families reside in the catchment area during such year.
( b ) Prepare an assessment of the need of the population proposed to be served by the migrant health center for the services set forth in § 56.102(g)(1) of subpart A of this part. This assessment of need must, at a minimum, include the factors listed in § 56.104(b)(3) (i)-(iv).
( c ) Design a migrant health center program for such population, based on the assessment prepared pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section which indicates in detail how the proposed center will fulfill the needs identified in that assessment and meet the requirements of subpart C of this part.
( d ) Develop a plan for the implementation of the program designed pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section. This implementation plan must provide for the time-phased recruitment and training of the personnel essential for the operation of a migrant health center and the gradual assumption of operational status of the project so that the project will, in the judgment of the Secretary, meet the requirements contained in subpart C of this part by the end of the project period.
( e ) Implement the plan developed pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section in accordance with such paragraph.
( f ) Make efforts to secure within the proposed catchment area of such center, to the extent possible, financial and professional assistance and support for the project.
( g ) Initiate and encourage continuing community involvement in the development and operation of the project through, for example, contributions or loans of cash, services, equipment, full-or part-time staff, space, materials, or facilities.
( h ) Provide for sufficient staff, qualified by training and experience, to carry out the project and establish standards and qualifications for personnel (including the project director).
( i ) Utilize, to the maximum extent feasible, other Federal, State, local, and private resources available for support of the project, prior to use of project funds under this subpart.
( j ) Provide the means for evaluating the project's progress in achievement of its specific objectives, and submit such progress reports on the project as the Secretary may from time to time request.
###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Part 2

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 68 FR 14337, Mar. 25, 2003.

#### § 2.65 Abandonment.

(a) An application will be abandoned if an applicant fails to respond to an Office action, or to respond completely, within the relevant time period for response under § 2.62(a)(1), including any granted extension of time to respond under § 2.62(a)(2). A timely petition to the Director pursuant to §§ 2.63(a) and (b) and 2.146 or notice of appeal to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board pursuant to § 2.142, if appropriate, is a response that avoids abandonment (see § 2.63(b)(4)).

(1) If all refusals and/or requirements are expressly limited to certain goods and/or services, the application will be abandoned only as to those goods and/or services.

(2) When a timely response by the applicant is a bona fide attempt to advance the examination of the application and is a substantially complete response to the examining attorney's action, but consideration of some matter or compliance with a requirement has been omitted, the examining attorney may grant the applicant 30 days, or to the end of the time period for response to the action to which the substantially complete response was submitted, whichever is longer, to explain and supply the omission before the examining attorney considers the question of abandonment.

(b) An application will be abandoned if an applicant expressly abandons the application pursuant to § 2.68.

(c) An application will be abandoned if an applicant in an application under section 1(b) of the Act fails to timely file either a statement of use under § 2.88 or a request for an extension of time for filing a statement of use under § 2.89.

[80 FR 2311, Jan. 16, 2015, as amended at 86 FR 64326, Nov. 17, 2021]

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

###### Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I

#### Editorial Note:

Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.
Czech Republic Ministry of Transport

Office ofInternational Aviation Department ofTransportation 400 7th Street, S.W., Room 6402 Washington, DC 20590 USA

Subject: Statement ofReciprocity nabre:lfLudvfka Svobody 1222/12 PO BOX 9, 110 15 Praha 1 Prague 

## S October 2014 Ref: 99/2014-220-LD/1

The Civil Aviation Department ofthe Ministry ofTransport ofthe Czech Republic hereby confirms that all traffic rights including fifth and seventh freedom for schedule or non-scheduled operation of any airline designated by the United States ofAmerica will be granted, on the basis ofreciprocity, in conformity with the Air Transport Agreement between the Government of the Czech Republic and the Government of the United States of America, signed at Prague on 10 September 1996, as amended by exchange of diplomatic notes dated 4 June 2001 and 14 February 2002, and the Air Transport Agreement between the United States of America and the European Community and its Member States, signed at Brussels on 25 April 2007 and at Washington on 30 April 2007, as amended by Protocol to amend the Air Transport Agreement between the United States ofAmerica and the European Community and its Member States, signed at Luxembourg on 24 June 2010.

Jaromir Stole Director



# - iiiiiii
iiiiiii
§ 488.1005 Definitions. As used in this subpart— *Immediate jeopardy* means a situation in which the provider's or supplier's non-compliance with one or more Medicare accreditation requirements has caused, or is likely to cause, serious injury, harm, impairment, or death to a patient.
*National accrediting organization* means an organization that accredits provider or supplier entities under a specific program and whose accredited provider or supplier entities under each program are widely dispersed geographically across the United States. In addition, the specific program is active, fully implemented, and operational.
*National in scope* means a program is fully implemented, operational, and widely dispersed geographically throughout the country.
*Qualified home infusion therapy supplier* means a supplier of home infusion therapy that meets the all of the following criteria which are set forth at section 1861(iii)(3)(D)(i) of the Act: ( 1 ) Furnishes infusion therapy to individuals with acute or chronic conditions requiring administration of home infusion drugs.
( 2 ) Ensures the safe and effective provision and administration of home infusion therapy on a 7-day-a-week, 24-hour-a-day basis.
( 3 ) Is accredited by an organization designated by the Secretary in accordance with section 1834(u)(5) of the Act.
( 4 ) Meets such other requirements as the Secretary determines appropriate.
*Reasonable assurance* means an accrediting organization has demonstrated to CMS' satisfaction that its accreditation program requirements meet or exceed the Medicare program requirements.
*Rural area* as defined at section 1886(d)(2)(D) of the Act.
*Substantial allegation of non-compliance* means a complaint from any of a variety of sources (such as patient, relative, or third party), including complaints submitted in person, by telephone, through written correspondence, or in the newspaper, magazine articles or other media, that would, if found to be present, adversely affect the health and safety of patients and raises doubts as to a qualified home infusion therapy supplier's compliance with the applicable Medicare accreditation requirements.