alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPublic Schedule...Public Schedule – August 2, 2021

# 									Public Schedule – August 2, 2021							

Public Schedule

Office of the Spokesperson

August 2, 2021

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

**SECRETARY ANTONY J. BLINKEN**

**2:00 p.m.**Secretary Blinken delivers remarks to the press on the announcement of a U.S. Refugee Admissions Program Priority 2 Designation for Afghan Nationals, at the Department of State.**(POOLED PRESS COVERAGE)**

*The Secretary’s remarks will be live streamed on**www.state.gov**.*

**4:00 p.m.** Secretary Blinken meets virtually with the Five Eyes Foreign Ministers, from the Department of State.**(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)**

**8:00 p.m.** Secretary Blinken participates virtually in the Mekong-U.S. Partnership Ministerial.**(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)**

**DEPUTY SECRETARY WENDY R. SHERMAN**

Deputy Secretary Sherman attends meetings and briefings, from the Department of State.

**DEPUTY SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES BRIAN P. MCKEON******

Deputy Secretary McKeon attends meetings and briefings, from the Department of State.

**UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS VICTORIA J. NULAND**

Under Secretary Nuland is on travel to South Africa, Botswana, Tanzania, and Niger from August 2-6, 2021. Please click here for more information.

**BRIEFING SCHEDULE**

The Department Press Briefing with Spokesperson Ned Price will immediately follow Secretary Blinken’s remarks.**(POOLED PRESS COVERAGE)**

*The Department Press Briefing will be live streamed on www.state.gov.*

Tags

Office of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
**Per Diem, Travel and Transportation Allowance Committee**
**Travel RegulationsOn-line Version (Updated Monthly)**
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Forbes Names U.S. Department of State as one of America’s Best-In-State Employers for 2023

# 									Forbes Names U.S. Department of State as one of America’s Best-In-State Employers for 2023							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

August 23, 2023

For the fifth year in a row, *Forbes*, in partnership with Statista, has named the U.S. Department of State as one of America’s Best-In-State Employers for both Washington, D.C. and Virginia for 2023. The Department also ranked second in Virginia and fifth in D.C. within the Government Services category.

Approximately 70,000 American workers, at U.S. organizations with more than 500 employees, were asked to rate their willingness to recommend their own employers to friends and family. Employees also evaluated other employers in their respective industries and identified factors that stood out either positively or negatively.

The survey considered every aspect of an employee’s experience, including working conditions, salary, potential for growth, and diversity. Of the thousands of companies eligible for this recognition, only a select few in each state receive the award.

Further information about the survey can be found here: Meet America’s Best Employers by State 2023 (forbes.com)

To learn more about Foreign and Civil Service careers, internships, and fellowships visit http://careers.state.gov.

Tags

Bureau of Global Talent ManagementCareersEducationOffice of the Spokesperson

## Related Articles

-  											 									
Read more
 

Back to Top
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1997 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1997

  To provide for reclassification of Chautauqua County, New York, for 
purposes of payment for inpatient hospital services under the Medicare 
                                Program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 23, 2007

 Mr. Higgins introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide for reclassification of Chautauqua County, New York, for 
purposes of payment for inpatient hospital services under the Medicare 
                                Program.

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

SECTION 1. RECLASSIFICATION OF CHAUTAUQUA COUNTY, NEW YORK, FOR 
              PURPOSES OF PAYMENT FOR INPATIENT HOSPITAL SERVICES UNDER 
              THE MEDICARE PROGRAM.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, effective for 
discharges occurring on or after September 30, 2007, for purposes of 
making payments under section 1886(d) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1395ww(d)) the large urban area of Buffalo-Niagara Falls, New 
York is deemed to include Chautauqua County, New York. For purposes of 
that section, the reclassification under this section shall be treated 
as a decision of the Medicare Geographic Classification Review Board 
under paragraph (10) of that section, except that in no case shall 
there be a reduction in the hospital wage index for Erie County, New 
York, or any adjoining county, as a result of the application of this 
section (other than as a result of a general reduction required to 
carry out paragraph (10)(D) of that section).
                                 <all>
```
110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2025

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 11033 South State Street in Chicago, Illinois, 

as the ‘‘Willye B. White Post Office Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 2025 EH

1 SECTION 1. WILLYE B. WHITE POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 11033 South State Street in Chi4 cago, Illinois, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Willye B. White Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Willye B. White Post 

10 Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 14, 2007. 

Attest:

Clerk. 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2025

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States PostOffice Building’’. Chicago, Illinois, as the ‘‘Willye B. White Post al Service located at 11033 South State Street in
#### James Thomas HOBBS, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. KK-496.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 13, 1979.

*723Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender and Margaret Good, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Carolyn M. Snurkowski, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

ERVIN, Judge.

Appellant, charged with two offenses, following trial was convicted of four. He appeals. We reverse in part.

Appellant was charged in one count with the lewd, lascivious assault upon a child under the age of 14, contrary to Section 800.04, Florida Statutes (1977), and in count two with the same act on another child. The jury, at the conclusion of the court’s instructions, was given two verdict forms. Both reflected that the jury could find the defendant guilty as charged, or for the lesser included offenses of attempted battery. The jury apparently misunderstood the court’s instructions and not only found appellant guilty as charged, but also of the lesser offenses. The court then polled the jurors and after each responded that the verdicts were as intended, the court adjudged appellant guilty on all offenses returned. Later a single sentence of four years imprisonment was imposed as to both the offense charged in count one and the lesser offense of attempted battery. A concurrent sentence of 60 days in the county jail was imposed as to the offense stated in the second count.

It is fundamental that a defendant cannot be convicted both for the offense charged as well as its lesser offense. The fact that defense counsel timely failed to object does not cure such error. This does not mean, however, that all the verdicts and judgments entered must be vacated. It is abundantly clear that the jury intended to find defendant guilty of all offenses returned. The verdicts returned for the greater offenses comported with the jury’s intent, cf. *Hambrick*v. *State,*80 Fla. 672, 86 So. 623 (Fla.1920), and they are sustained. The verdicts and judgments entered as to the lesser offenses are vacated and the cause is remanded to the trial court for sentencing proceedings consistent with this opinion.

The remaining points urged by appellant as requiring reversal have been considered and rejected. AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Acting C. J., and LARRY G. SMITH, J., concur.
HomePRM-funded Evaluation and Research...PRM-funded Research

# 						PRM-funded Research					

0 items
Clear All Filters

## View collection by:

Back to Top
41571.

#### PLASTICS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. FLEXIBLE PRODUCTS COMPANY.

*461Argued October 6, 1965

Decided October 15, 1965.

*Robert Paul Leiter, Marvin O’Neal, Jr.,*for plaintiff in error.

*Smith, & Custer, Lawrence B. Custer,*contra.

Haul, Judge.

The defendant contends that the petition and its exhibits showing the above quoted provision show that the amount sued for is usurious.

“While it is lawful and not usurious to charge one price for property sold for cash and a higher price for the same property if sold on credit, still, if the contract is that the property is to be sold at a cash valuation, and that certain payments are to be deferred, in consideration that a greater rate of interest than that allowed by law is to be paid by the purchaser, then the contract would be usurious.” *Irvin v. Mathews,*75 Ga. 739; *Rushing v. Worsham & Co.,*102 Ga. 825, 829 (30 SE 541); *Bird v. Benton,*127 Ga. 371, 373 (56 SE 450); *E. Tris Napier Co. v. Trawick,*164 Ga. 781, 782 (139 SE 552).

The invoices reflecting the terms of the sale transactions alleged in the present petition show on their face the intent to *462charge more for the forbearance of money than the highest rate permitted by law. *Code*§ 57-101; *Shealy v. Toole,*56 Ga. 210, 213; *Bird v. Benton,*supra, 374; *Ozmore v. Coram,*133 Ga. 250 (65 SE 448); accord *Atlanta Savings Bank v. Spencer,*107 Ga. 629, 633 (33 SE 878).

Therefore the trial court erred in overruling demurrers numbered 3 and 4 to the allegations of paragraphs 4 and 5 of the petition that the plaintiff is entitled to recover sums calculated in accordance with the quoted provision of the invoices.

Since the petition does not show that the plaintiff cannot recover the amount shown on the invoices as the price of the goods, the trial court did not err in overruling the general demurrer. *Code*§ 57-112. The trial court did not err in overruling the special demurrer on the ground that the exhibits show on their face the amount sued for was usurious, because the exhibits show only that part of the amount sued for—that calculated under the quoted provision for interest—was usurious. The trial court did not err in overruling the demurrer numbered 2 to paragraph 1 of the petition, since not all the allegations of that paragraph, demurred to as a whole, were subject to the demurrer.

*Judgment overruling demurrers numbered 8 and 4 t° paragraphs 4 and 5 of the petition reversed; otherwise affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., and Frankum, J., concur.*
From: To: EAS (OSJ) Subject: ElDorado air service Date: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 8:05:58 AM

Dear Sir/Madame, I travel on Seaport air ELD-MEM at least once aweek and really appreciate this service. I live in Magnolia and am 2+ hours from any other airport. Though that may notsound like a long drive, rest assured that navigating 2 hours ofdeer infested, winding roads can make 2 hours feel like 6. Currently they use the Pilatus on my route with onlythe occasional Caravan. While we all prefer the Pilatus for its higher speeds, we arejust happyto be lifted up and outofSouth AR on anything as opposed to driving. Seaport does agoodjobso please keep this service forthe So AR area. Kindest regards, Marsha Cowling
****

This chart presents 1996 Arizona 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 Arizona
Return to USA Export Map
Return to BISNIS Home Page
#### § 51b.101 To which programs do these regulations apply?

The regulations in this part apply to grants for preventive health service programs authorized under section 317 (42 U.S.C. 247b) and for venereal disease prevention and control programs authorized under section 318 (42 U.S.C. 247c) of the Act.
Exhibit 10.9

                                 PROMISSORY NOTE

                                                          New York, New York
                                                          November 7, 2003

      FOR  VALUE  RECEIVED,  the  undersigned  BRANDPARTNERS  GROUP,  INC.  (the
"Maker")  hereby  promises  to pay to the  order  of  Filter  International (the
"Holder"),  the principal sum of $100,000 with interest  thereon at 5% per annum
on December 9, 2003.

      1.  Payment of  principal is to be made at such address as to which Holder
shall  notify the Maker in writing,  prior to  maturity,  in lawful money of the
United States.

      2. If,  under  any  bankruptcy  or  insolvency  law or  other  law for the
reorganization  arrangement,  composition or similar relief or aid of debtors or
creditors: (a) the Maker is adjudicated a bankrupt, or takes or seeks to take or
to have taken, or consents to the taking of, any action with respect to him or a
substantial  part  of  his  property  or  affairs,  or  (b)  a  Court  or  other
governmental authority of competent jurisdiction (i) approves a petition seeking
any such  relief or aid with  respect  to the  Maker,  (ii)  appoints a trustee,
receiver,  or liquidator of the Maker or of substantially all of his property or
affairs,  or (iii)  assumes  custody  or  control  of  substantially  all of the
property or affairs of the Maker,  such approval or  appointment is not vacated,
or the custody or control is not terminated, within sixty (60) days or stayed on
appeal,  then,  at the option of the  Holder,  the Holder may declare the unpaid
balance of the  principal  and  accrued  interest,  if any,  if not then due and
payable to be due and payable.

      3. The Maker  shall have the right of  prepayment,  so long as interest is
paid up to the date of said prepayment.

                                            BRANDPARTNERS GROUP, INC.

                                        By:    /s/ Anthony J. Cataldo
                                               ---------------------------------


AGREED TO:

By: /s/
    -----------------------------
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 180 (Friday, September 18, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 47921]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22496]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Docket 51-2008]


Foreign-Trade Zone 82, Application for Subzone Authority, 
ThyssenKrupp Steel and Stainless USA, LLC, Extension of Comment Period

    The comment period for the application for subzone status at the 
ThyssenKrupp Steel and Stainless USA, LLC (ThyssenKrupp) facility in 
Calvert, Alabama (73 FR 58535-58536, 10/7/08 ) is being extended to 
October 9, 2009 to allow interested parties additional time in which to 
comment. Rebuttal comments may be submitted during the subsequent 15-
day period, until October 26, 2009. Submissions shall be addressed to 
the Board's Executive Secretary at: Foreign-Trade Zones Board, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, Room 2111, 1401 Constitution Ave. NW, 
Washington, DC 20230. Submissions can be emailed to the address 
provided below.
    For further information, contact Elizabeth Whiteman at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#12577e7b68737077667a4d457a7b66777f737c527b66733c767d713c757d64"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d297bebba8b3b0b7a6ba8d85babba6b7bfb3bc92bba6b3fcb6bdb1fcb5bda4">[email protected]</span></a> or (202) 482-0473.

    Dated: September 9, 2009.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-22496 Filed 9-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Proposed Rule: Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions 

Meeting Documentation: SEMI Date Staff Contact Information Name of Organization Summary of Discussion Written Comm

Provided? Did they also submit to Dock

June 9, Kirsten Cappel • Identified below. Participants raised concerns with the SEMI provide

2010 (202) 343-9556 

cappel.kirsten@epa.gov 

• EPA Climate Change Division and EPA contractors: Kirsten Cappel, EPA; Scott Bartos, EPA; Deb Harris, ICF International. 

inclusion, in EPA’s proposed rule on Electronics Manufacturing (subpart I), of SEMI E10-0304E Specification for 

Definition and Measurement of Equipment Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (SEMI standard). Participants asserted that EPA incorrectly used the SEMI standard and that reference to the standard should be removed from the regulatory text. Participants indicated that comments would be submitted with recommendations for regulation text to account for uptime without reference to the SEMI standard. 

comments. 

Participants: Alan Crockett, KLA-Tencor, alan.crockett@kla-tencor.com David Busing, KLA Tencor, david.busing@kla-tencor.com Ian McLeod, SEMI, imcleod@semi.org Janet Burggraf, Linear Technology, jburggraf@linear.com Jay Dietrich, IBM, jdietric@us.ibm.com Joe Van Gompel, MIDAC Corporation, jvangompel@gmail.com John Ellis, SEMI, jellsi@semi.org Jonathan Davis, SEMI, jdavis@semi.org Kulraj Bhullor, NeoPhotonics, kulraj.bhullor@neophotonics.com Mike Sherer, Sherer Consulting, msherereng@aol.com 

1
 
Revati Kasmalkar, Tantra Consulting, revati.kasmalkar@yahoo.com 

Sanjay Baliga, SEMI, sbaliga@semi.org Sebastien Raoux, Transcarbon, sraoux@transcarbon.com Susan Turner, SEMI, sturner@semi.org Tim Higgs, Intel, tim.g.higgs@intel.com Tracey Christiansen, Polycom, etaetc@gmail.com 

2
#### THE UNITED STATES v. NELSON W. RIDER.

[57 C. Cls. 323; 261 U.S. 363.]

Judgment was rendered against the United States in the court below. On appeal the judgment was reversed, and the Supreme Court decided:

The act of June 15, 1917, c. 29, 40 Stat. 188, in making a deficiency appropriation for “ pay at $100 per month for enlisted men in training for officers of the Reserve Corps,” intended merely to abolish the discrimination existing between the pay then allowed enlisted men and that allowed civilians training in like circumstances; it was not a fixing of base pay.

Consequently, a first-class private in the aviation section of the Signal Enlisted Reserve Corps, who, before this act received $33 per month as base pay and 50 per cent additional for flight duty, under the act Of July 18, 1914, c. 186, 38 Stat. 516, was not entitled to any allowance for such duty in addition to the monthly pay of $100.

This provision for $100 pay was not continued beyond June 30, 1918, the limit of the act of June 15, 1917, *supra,*making the appropriation.

Mr. Chief Justice Taft

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court March 19, 1923.
§ 478.14 Applicability. ( a ) *Basic provision.* This subpart applies to reconsiderations and hearings of a QIO initial denial determination involving the following issues: ( 1 ) Reasonableness of services.
( 2 ) Medical necessity of services.
( 3 ) Appropriateness of the inpatient setting in which services were furnished or are proposed to be furnished.
( b ) *Concurrent appeal.* A reconsideration or hearing provided under this subpart fulfills the requirements of any other review, hearing, or appeal under the Act to which a party may be entitled with respect to the same issues.
( c ) *Nonapplicability of rules to related determinations.* ( 1 ) A QIO may not reconsider its decision whether to grant grace days.
( 2 ) Limitation of liability determinations on excluded coverage of certain services are made under section 1879 of the Act. Initial determinations under section 1879 and further appeals are governed by the reconsideration and appeal procedures in part 405, subpart I of this chapter for determinations under Medicare Part A and Part B. References in those subparts to initial and reconsidered determinations made by an intermediary, carrier or CMS should be read to mean initial and reconsidered determinations made by a QIO.
[50 FR 15372, Apr. 17, 1985; 50 FR 41887, Oct. 16, 1985. Redesignated at 64 FR 66279, Nov. 24, 1999; 82 FR 5139, Jan. 17, 2017]
§ 85.2 Definitions. Any term defined in the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 or the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and not defined below shall have the meaning given it in the respective Acts. As used in this part: *OSH Act* means the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651, *et seq.*).
*FMSH Act* means the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 801, *et seq.*).
*Authorized representative of employees* means any person or organization meeting the conditions specified in § 85.3-1(e) (1), (2), or (3).
*Employee* has the same meaning as stated in the OSH Act and for the purposes of this part includes *miner* as defined in the FMSH Act.
*Employer* has the same meaning as stated in the OSH Act and for the purposes of this part includes *Operator* as defined in the FMSH Act.
*Health hazard evaluation* means the investigation and the determination of potentially toxic or hazardous effects of: ( a ) Any substance normally used or found in any place of employment to which the OSH Act is applicable, or
( b ) any substance or physical agent normally used or found in any place of employment to which the FMSH Act is applicable.
*Investigation* means a physical inspection of the place of employment under section 8 of the OSH Act or section 103 of the FMSH Act and includes inspection, sampling, observations, review of pertinent records, and other measurements reasonably necessary to determine whether any substance or physical agent found in the place of employment has potentially toxic or hazardous effects in the concentrations or levels used or found.
*NIOSH* means the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Center for Disease Control, Public Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services.
*NIOSH officer* means a NIOSH employee who has been authorized by the Director, NIOSH, to conduct investigations according to this part.
*Physical agent* means any condition produced by the environment and/or work processes that can result in hazardous effects as defined in this section. Examples of physical agents are noise, temperature, illumination, vibration, radiation, and pressure.
*Place of employment* means any coal or other mine, factory, plant, establishment, construction site, or other area, workplace, or environment where work is performed by any employee of an employer.
*Substance* means any chemical or biological agent or dust which has the potential to produce toxic effects.
Toxic effects or hazardous effects are those effects which result in short- or long-term disease, bodily injury, affect health adversely, or endanger human life.
[45 FR 2652, Jan. 14, 1980]