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

#### § 41.152 Applicability of the Federal Rules of Evidence.

(a) *Generally.* Except as otherwise provided in this subpart, the Federal Rules of Evidence shall apply to contested cases.

(b) *Exclusions.* Those portions of the Federal Rules of Evidence relating to criminal proceedings, juries, and other matters not relevant to proceedings under this subpart shall not apply.

(c) *Modifications in terminology.* Unless otherwise clear from context, the following terms of the Federal Rules of Evidence shall be construed as indicated:

*Appellate court* means United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or a United States district court when judicial review is under 35 U.S.C. 146.

*Civil action, civil proceeding, action,* and *trial* mean contested case.

*Courts of the United States, U.S. Magistrate, court, trial court,* and *trier of fact* mean Board.

*Hearing* means:

(i) In Federal Rule of Evidence 703, the time when the expert testifies.

(ii) In Federal Rule of Evidence 804(a)(5), the time for taking testimony.

*Judge* means the Board.

*Judicial notice* means official notice.

*Trial or hearing* means, in Federal Rule of Evidence 807, the time for taking testimony.

(d) The Board, in determining foreign law, may consider any relevant material or source, including testimony, whether or not submitted by a party or admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF: Docket No. F AA-2016-4261 

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC .. FAA Case No. 2013S0700189 

Respondent Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan 

NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT 

Pursuant to the provisions of 14 C.P.R.§ 13.215, the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), by counsel, hereby withdraws its Complaint dated March 3, 2016. 

Respectfully submitted this 21st day of April, 2016. 

Attorney 

Southern Team 

Enforcement Division (AGC-300) 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that the foregoing has been mailed this date by Federal Express to: 

Federal Aviation Administration (original + 1 copy in each case) 

600 Independence A venue, SW 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 

Administrative Law Judge J. E. Sullivan 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

Meaghan Goodwin Boyd 

meaghan.boyd@alston.com 

Alston & Bird LLP 

1201 W. Peachtree Street 

Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3424 

FROST BROWN TODD LLC 

Winston E. Miller 

wmiller@fbtlaw.com 

Miles R. Harrison 

mharrison@fblaw .com 

400 W. Market Street, 32nd Fl. 

Louisville, KY 40202 

Paul Alp 

Crowell & Moring LLP 

1001 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

Washington DC 20004-2595 

APR 2 1 20JI 

Dated 

2
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-7461

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus BILL WINFIELD CONARD, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-01-286; CA-04-1462-6) Submitted: January 13, 2005 Decided: January 20, 2005 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bill Winfield Conard, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Jean Howard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Bill Winfield Conard seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) on the grounds that it was filed beyond the one-year limit for such actions. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Conard has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
§ 483.65 Specialized rehabilitative services. ( a ) *Provision of services.* If specialized rehabilitative services such as but not limited to physical therapy, speech-language pathology, occupational therapy, respiratory therapy, and rehabilitative services for a mental disorder and intellectual disability or services of a lesser intensity as set forth at § 483.120(c), are required in the resident's comprehensive plan of care, the facility must— ( 1 ) Provide the required services; or
( 2 ) In accordance with § 483.70(f), obtain the required services from an outside resource that is a provider of specialized rehabilitative services and is not excluded from participating in any Federal or State health care programs pursuant to section 1128 and 1156 of the Act.
( b ) *Qualifications.* Specialized rehabilitative services must be provided under the written order of a physician by qualified personnel.
[56 FR 48875, Sept. 26, 1991, as amended at 57 FR 43925, Sept. 23, 1992. Redesignated and amended at 81 FR 68861, 68865, Oct. 4, 2016; 89 FR 40999, May 10, 2024]
§ 494.1 Basis and scope. ( a ) *Statutory basis.* This part is based on the following provisions: ( 1 ) Section 299I of the Social Security Amendments of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-603), which extended Medicare coverage to insured individuals, their spouses, and their dependent children with ESRD who require dialysis or transplantation.
( 2 ) Section 1861(e)(9) of the Act, which requires hospitals to meet such other requirements as the Secretary finds necessary in the interest of health and safety of individuals who are furnished services in the institution.
( 3 ) Section 1861(s)(2)(F) of the Act, which describes “medical and other health services” covered under Medicare to include home dialysis supplies and equipment, self-care home dialysis support services, and institutional dialysis services and supplies, for items and services furnished on or after January 1, 2011, renal dialysis services (as defined in section 1881(b)(14)(B)), including such renal dialysis services furnished on or after January 1, 2017, by a renal dialysis facility or provider of services paid under section 1881(b)(14) to an individual with acute kidney injury (as defined in section 1834(r)(2)).
( 4 ) Section 1862(a) of the Act, which specifies exclusions from coverage.
( 5 ) Section 1881 of the Act, which authorizes Medicare coverage and payment for the treatment of ESRD in approved facilities, including institutional dialysis services, transplantation services, self-care home dialysis services, and the administration of erythropoiesis-stimulating agent(s).
( 6 ) Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113), which requires Federal agencies to use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies, unless their use would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
( 7 ) Section 1861(s)(2)(F) of the Act, which authorizes coverage for renal dialysis services furnished on or after January 1, 2017 by a renal dialysis facility or provider of services currently paid under section 1881(b)(14) of the Act to an individual with AKI.
( b ) *Scope.* The provisions of this part establish the conditions for coverage of services under Medicare and are the basis for survey activities for the purpose of determining whether an ESRD facility's services may be covered.
[73 FR 20475, Apr. 15, 2008, as amended at 81 FR 77969, Nov. 4, 2016]
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2120 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2120

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To direct the Secretary of the Interior to proclaim as reservation for 
the benefit of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians a parcel 
 of land now held in trust by the United States for that Indian tribe.

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

SECTION 1. LAND TO BE PROCLAIMED RESERVATION.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
Secretary of the Interior shall proclaim as reservation for the benefit 
of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians the parcel of land 
now held in trust by the United States and having the legal description 
as follows: That portion of Section 19, Township 41 North, Range 3 
West, Michigan Meridian, described as: All of the NW1/4SW1/4 and all of 
the S1/2SW1/4 Northerly of a line described as beginning 650 feet 
Northerly along the centerline of Highway ``Mackinac Trail'' from the 
intersection of said centerline with the South Section line of Section 
19, Township 41 North, Range 3 West, thence Northeasterly to the 
Southeast corner of the NW1/4SW1/4 of said Section, containing 65 
acres, more or less (except the highway right-of-way and easements of 
record).
    (b) Applicable Law; Effective Date.--The Secretary's proclamation 
shall be pursuant to section 7 of the Act of June 18, 1934 (25 U.S.C. 
467) and shall be deemed effective as of April 19, 1988.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 30, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2120

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to proclaim as reservation for 
the benefit of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians a parcel 
 of land now held in trust by the United States for that Indian tribe.
```
Exhibit 10(a)4

                               FIRST AMENDMENT TO
                              THE SOUTHERN COMPANY
                           DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN


         WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of Southern Company Services, Inc. (the
"Company") heretofore established and adopted the Southern Company Deferred
Compensation Plan, as amended and restated effective February 23, 2001 (the
"Plan"); and

         WHEREAS, Section 8.3 of the Plan provides that the Plan may be amended
or modified by the Committee, if such amendment or modification does not involve
a substantial increase in cost to any Employing Company; and

         WHEREAS, the Committee desires to amend the Plan to clarify that the
Plan provides the Company with the authority to reduce Compensation and/or
Incentive Pay for any mandatory taxes prior to applying any election to defer
such Compensation and/or Incentive Pay under the Plan; and

         WHEREAS, the Committee has determined that the above amendments do not
involve a substantial increase in cost to any Employing Company.

         NOW THEREFORE, effective September 27, 2002, the Committee hereby
amends the Plan as follows:

                                       1.

                  5.1 A Participant may elect to defer payment of a portion of
         his or her Compensation otherwise payable to him by his or her
         Employing Company during each payroll period of the next succeeding
         Plan Year by any whole percentage not to exceed fifty percent (50%) of
         his or her Compensation, or such greater or lesser amount as shall be
         determined by the Committee from time to time. A Participant may also
         elect to defer payment of up to one hundred percent (100%), by whole
         percentages, of any Incentive Pay otherwise payable to him or her by
         his or her Employing Company. The Company shall have the authority to
         withhold any mandatory taxes from Compensation and/or Incentive Pay
         prior to the application of a Deferral Election.

                                       2.

                  Except as amended herein, by this First Amendment, the Plan
         shall remain in full force and effect as amended and restated by the
         Company.



<PAGE>


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Committee, through its duly authorized member,
has adopted the First Amendment to the Southern Company Deferred Compensation
Plan, as amended and restated as of February 23, 2001, this 27th day of
September, 2002.


                                                  SOUTHERN COMPANY DEFERRED
                                                  COMPENSATION PLAN COMMITTEE


                                                  By:

(CORPORATE SEAL)
                                                  Its:


Attest:


Tommy Chisolm
Secretary
#### SWIMMS, ET AL. V. CITY OF FLORENCE.

(Decided Feb. 8, 1912.)

Appeal from Lauderdale Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. C. P. Almon.

No counsel marked for either party.

Per curiam.

Affirmed oh certificate.
#### Michael Sess et al., Appellants, *v.*David Richey et al., Respondents.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of defendants.

Leopold Leo (William Haupt, of counsel), for appellants.

Edwards & Bryan (Robert H. Patten, 2d, of counsel), for-respondents.

*Per Curiam.*

We concur in the verdict of the jury. They believed that if plaintiffs had been allowed to perform their contract: with defendants they would have lost money instead of making a profit; they evidently wished to prevent defendants from recovering two bills of costs herein, therefore, they rendered a verdict for-plaintiffs for nominal damages supposing that such a verdict would so save-plaintiffs. A verdict in favor of defendants would have been justified by the evidence.' After a careful perusal of the-verdict, we think that no injustice was done plaintiffs.

Present: Eitzsimohs, Ch. J., and O’Dwyeb, J.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
- 372 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 308 Nebraska Reports GARRISON v . OTTO Cite as 308 Neb. 372

Margaret L. Garrison, appellee, v. Logan M. Otto II, appellant. ___ N.W.2d ___ Filed February 5, 2021. No. S-20-386. Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County: John A. Colborn , Judge. Affirmed. Edith T. Peebles, of Brodkey, Cuddigan, Peebles, Belmont & Line, L.L.P., for appellant. Adam R. Little, of Ballew Hazen, P.C., L.L.O., for appellee.
Heavican , C.J., Miller

- Lerman , Cassel , Stacy, Funke , Papik , and Freudenberg , JJ. Per Curiam

. This is an appeal of a domestic abuse protection order, which we moved to our docket. See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 24-1106(3) (Cum. Supp. 2018). The court, having considered the oral arguments and hav

ing reviewed the record de novo, finds that the domestic abuse protection order entered by the trial court should be affirmed. Affirmed. Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 04/16/2021 09:09 AM CDT
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Shelter
Properties VI Limited Partnership (1998 Third Quarter 10-QSB) and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such 10-QSB filing.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000730013
<NAME> SHELTER PROPERTIES VI LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1998
<CASH>                                           2,934
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          53,036
<DEPRECIATION>                                  26,266
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,789
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                         26,316
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,044
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,789
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,075
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,561
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,814
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       206
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     4.82<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet.
<F2>Multiplier is 1.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### § 73.0 Applicability and related requirements.

All individuals and entities that possess SARS-CoV, Lujo virus, or Chapare virus must provide notice to CDC regarding their possession of SARS-CoV, Lujo virus, or Chapare virus on or before December 4, 2012. Currently registered individuals and entities possessing SARS-CoV, Lujo virus, or Chapare virus must meet all the requirements of this part by December 4, 2012. All previously unregistered individuals and entities possessing SARS-CoV, Lujo virus, or Chapare virus must meet all of the requirements of this part by April 3, 2013.

[77 FR 61110, Oct. 5, 2012, as amended at 77 FR 71702, Dec. 4, 2012]
HomeBureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement AffairsRemarks & Releases... Promoting Women and Women’s Perspectives 

# 									 Promoting Women and Women’s Perspectives 							

Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs

The Women Peace and Security Act, which was signed into law in October 2017, highlights the role of the United States and the Department of State in particular in promoting the “meaningful participation of women and girls in all aspects of overseas conflict prevention, management, and resolution.”  This Act enshrines the pivotal role women and girls play in promoting stable and lasting peace and security.  Building on its longstanding relationship with criminal justice professionals worldwide, INL makes significant contributions to fulfill the goals of the Act.

INL’s work advances women’s full participation in criminal justice professions abroad.  Increasing the participation of women as criminal justice practitioners bolsters the effectiveness of the system.  For example, increasing numbers of women police strengthens understanding of and response to crime in a community and builds community trust.   In certain contexts, women police alone can conduct searches of women, and women law enforcement officers may have access to segments of the community open only to women.  Research has shown a positive correlation between the percent of women in a police force and the reporting of crimes, including sexual assault and domestic violence.

INL creates opportunities for women by providing hands-on training, offering study visits, and promoting connections with international organizations.  INL’s **International Law Enforcement Academies (ILEAs)** have trained over 12,000 female criminal justice officials from more than 100 countries.  INL also supports the participation of women police and judges from a variety of partner countries in national and international conferences to discuss substantive legal issues and common challenges facing women practitioners.

Increasing numbers of women in criminal justice professions is just one way INL helps partner governments improve their responses to sexual and gender-based violence.  In addition, INL provides legal aid and holistic support for survivors, as well as works to improve the efficiency and transparency of courts to strengthen access to justice.

INL employs a gender advisor to promote and support integration of women and their perspectives into INL programs.  The**INL Guide to Gender in the Criminal Justice System** offers guidance on integrating women’s perspectives into police, justice sector, and corrections programming.  Before they are deployed, many U.S. advisors are trained on the importance of promoting women practitioners in the criminal justice system and strengthening justice for survivors of sexual and gender-based violence.  INL also disseminates these best practices with U.S.-based state and local partners across the criminal justice system.

Tags

Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement AffairsGender-based ViolenceWomen's Issues

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top