alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

## IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-10286 In The Matter Of: TRINITY MEADOWS RACEWAY INC Debtor TRINITY MEADOWS RACEWAY INC Appellant v. TEXAS RACING COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF TEXAS; R DYKE ROGERS, In Capacity as former and acting chair of the Texas Racing Commission of the State of Texas Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:07-CV-670 Before KING, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * 

### After having reviewed the briefs and the record, we AFFIRM for essentially the reasons given by the learned bankruptcy judge in his Memorandum Opinion entered on September 12, 2007. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## F I L E D January 13, 2009 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
Opinion issued February 4, 2016

In The 

## Court of Appeals
For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01

- 15

- 00703

- CV

——————————— IN RE C

. M

. , Relator

O riginal Proceeding o n Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, C.M. , has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, c hallenging the juvenile court’s order waiving its jurisdiction and transferring him to criminal district court for criminal proceedings. 1 See T EX

. F AM

. C ODE A NN

. § 54.02(j) (Vernon 2014).

1 The underlying proceeding is In the Matter of C.M.M. , cause number 2008

- 06648J, in the 313th District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Glenn Devlin presiding.2

We deny the petition.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley , and Lloyd

.
§ 82.26 How will NIOSH report dose reconstruction results? ( a ) NIOSH will provide dose reconstruction results to the claimant, DOL, and DOE in a report: “NIOSH Report of Dose Reconstruction under EEOICPA.” The report itself will not provide information on probability of causation, which DOL must calculate to determine a recommended decision on the claim.
( b ) The report will include the following information, as relevant: ( 1 ) Annual dose estimates (or a fraction thereof) related to covered employment for each year from the date of initial radiation exposure at a covered facility to the date of cancer diagnosis;
( 2 ) Separate dose estimates for acute and chronic exposures, different types of ionizing radiation, and internal and external doses, providing internal dose information only for the organ or tissue relevant to the primary cancer site(s) established in the claim;
( 3 ) Uncertainty distributions associated with each dose estimated, as necessary;
( 4 ) Explanation of each type of dose estimate included in terms of its relevance for estimating probability of causation;
( 5 ) Identification of any information provided by the claimant relevant to dose estimation that NIOSH decided to omit from the basis for dose reconstruction, justification for the decision, and if possible, a quantitative estimate of the effect of the omission on the dose reconstruction results; and
( 6 ) A summary and explanation of information and methods applied to produce the dose reconstruction estimates, including any factual findings and the evidence upon which those findings are based.
( c ) As provided under § 82.10(l), NIOSH staff will conduct a closing interview with claimants to explain the dose reconstruction report.
§ 82.3 What Are the Requirements for Dose Reconstruction Under EEOICPA? ( a ) Dose reconstructions are to be conducted for the following covered employees with cancer seeking compensation under EEOICPA: An employee who was not monitored for exposure to radiation at DOE or Atomic Weapons Employer (AWE) facilities; an employee who was monitored inadequately for exposure to radiation at such facilities; or an employee whose records of exposure to radiation at such facility are missing or incomplete. Technical limitations of radiation monitoring technology and procedures will require HHS to evaluate each employee's recorded dose. In most, if not all cases, monitoring limitations will result in possibly undetected or unrecorded doses, which are estimated using commonly practiced dose reconstruction methods and would have to be added to the dose record.
( b ) Section 7384(n)(e) of EEOICPA requires the reporting of radiation dose information resulting from dose reconstructions to the covered employees for whom claims are being adjudicated. DOE is specifically charged with this responsibility but the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which will be producing the dose reconstruction information, will report its findings directly to the claimant, as well as to DOL and DOE. HHS will also make available to researchers and the general public information on the assumptions, methodology, and data used in estimating radiation doses, as required by EEOICPA.
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPublic Schedule...Public Schedule – February 15, 2021

# 									Public Schedule – February 15, 2021							

Public Schedule

Office of the Spokesperson

February 15, 2021

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

The Department of State is closed in observance of President’s Day.

**SECRETARY ANTONY J. BLINKEN**

Secretary Blinken has no public appointments.

Tags

Office of the SpokespersonThe Secretary of State

Back to Top
###### 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.

#### § 42.61 Admissibility.

(a) Evidence that is not taken, sought, or filed in accordance with this subpart is not admissible.

(b) *Records of the Office.* Certification is not necessary as a condition to admissibility when the evidence to be submitted is a record of the Office to which all parties have access.

(c) *Specification and drawings.* A specification or drawing of a United States patent application or patent is admissible as evidence only to prove what the specification or drawing describes. If there is data in the specification or a drawing upon which a party intends to rely to prove the truth of the data, an affidavit by an individual having first-hand knowledge of how the data was generated must be filed.
Home2023 Treaties and Agreements...Nepal (23-830) – Millennium Challenge Compact

# 									Nepal (23-830) – Millennium Challenge Compact							

TIAS

Office of Treaty Affairs

August 30, 2023

Foreign Assistance: Millennium Challenge

Signed at Washington September 14, 2017; entered into force August 30, 2023.

With Annexes.
Download Agreement						 [7 MB]

Tags

Foreign AssistanceMillennium ChallengeNepalTreaties

Back to Top
§ 232.5 Legal counsel and authorized representative conduct. ( a ) *Notices of appearance.* If a party elects to be represented by legal counsel or other *authorized representative* in a proceeding, such legal counsel or *authorized representative,* other than the legal counsel or *authorized representative* who filed the claim on the claimant's behalf, must file a request to link their eCCB user account to the case and to the party or parties in that case whom they represent. The legal counsel or *authorized representative* must make sure that their eCCB user account accurately contains the legal counsel's bar number in a State in which the legal counsel has been admitted to practice (if applicable), and the legal counsel or *authorized representative's* mailing address, email address, and telephone number. If a legal counsel or *authorized representative* wishes to withdraw its representation, the legal counsel or *authorized representative* must file a Request to Withdraw Representation.
( b ) *Bar admissions.* A legal counsel must be a member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a State, the District of Columbia, or any territory or commonwealth of the United States. A law student representative must qualify under regulations governing law student representation of a party set forth in part 234 of this subchapter. The legal counsel or *authorized representative* must file with the Board a written statement under penalty of perjury that the legal counsel or *authorized representative* is currently qualified and is authorized to represent the party on whose behalf the legal counsel or *authorized representative* appears.
( c ) *Disbarred legal counsel.* Any legal counsel who has been disbarred by any Federal court, a court of any State, the District of Columbia, or any territory or commonwealth of the United States shall not be allowed to represent a party before the Board. If a legal counsel in any proceeding active or pending before the Board is disbarred, the legal counsel must report the disbarment to the Board and withdraw representation from any proceeding.
( d ) *Duties toward the Board and the parties.* A legal counsel or *authorized representative* has a duty of candor and impartiality toward the Board, and a duty of fairness toward opposing parties. In assessing whether a legal counsel has breached its duties, the Board shall consider the rules of professional conduct of the District of Columbia and the State in which the legal counsel practices.
( e ) *Penalties for violation.* Any legal counsel or *authorized representative* found to be in violation of any of the rules of conduct as set forth in this section, or who is otherwise found to be behaving unethically or inappropriately before the Board, may be barred from representing parties in proceedings before the Board for a period of twelve months.
[87 FR 30090, May 17, 2022; 87 FR 36061, June 15, 2022]
41355.

#### PAZOL v. CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK OF SANDY SPRINGS.

Argued June 7, 1965

Decided July 15, 1965

Rehearing denied July 30, 1965.

*Parker & Parker, Richard L. Parker, Melvin Pazol,*for plaintiff in error.

*Alston, Miller & Gaines, Hewitt H. Covington, Michael A. Doyle,*contra.

Felton, Chief Judge.

It appearing from the additional record, certified and sent to this court on the motion of the defendant in error, that the defendant’s motion to set aside the judgment which is excepted to in this case (the granting of the summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff) was still pending in the trial court at the time the purported bill of exceptions was certified, although said motion was subsequently denied, there was no exception to a final judgment; therefore the writ of error was premature and must be dismissed. *Code Ann.*§ 6-701; *State Bank of Leesburg v. Hatcher,*106 Ga. App. 735 (128 SE2d 339); *Fulton v. Chattanooga Pub. Co.,*98 Ga. App. 473 (105 SE2d 922); *Todd v. Douglas-Guardian Warehouse Corp.,*98 Ga. App. 673106 SE2d 347); *Wood v. Sheppard,*99 Ga. App. 537 (109 SE2d 69).

In addition to the fact that the motion to set aside the summary judgment was pending at the time of the exception to the summary judgment itself, the court in its nisi on the motion to vacate the summary judgment stayed all proceedings to enforce the summary judgment. It is apparent that an additional ruling was required by the court to make a final determination of the case.

*Writ of error dismissed.*

*Jordan and Deen, JJ., concur.*
#### § 61.30 Definitions.

As used in this part:

*Continental United States* does not include Hawaii or Alaska.

*Secretary* means the Secretary of Health and Human Services and any other officer or employee of the Department of Health and Human Services to whom the authority involved may be delegated.

*Service Fellowship* is one which requires the performance of services, either full or part time, for the Public Health Service.

[63 FR 9950, Feb. 27, 1998]
Editorial Note on Part 84
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 84 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

§ 84.119 Facepieces; eyepieces; minimum requirements. ( a ) Full facepieces shall be designed and constructed to provide adequate vision which is not distorted by the eye.
( b ) All eyepieces shall be designed and constructed to be impact and penetration resistant. Federal Specification, Mask, Air Line: and Respirator, Air Filtering, Industrial, GGG-M-125d, October 11, 1965 with interim amendment-1, July 30, 1969, is an example of an appropriate standard for determining impact and penetration resistance. Copies of GGG-M-125d may be obtained from the NIOSH, National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, P.O. Box 18070, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236.
[60 FR 30355, June 8, 1995, as amended at 80 FR 3907, Jan. 26, 2015]
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 542/2005

of 7 April 2005         

fixing the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 487/2005

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 12(1) thereof,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 1 to 7 April 2005, pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 487/2005, the maximum reduction in the duty on maize imported shall be 29,68 EUR/t and be valid for a total maximum quantity of 79 900 t.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 8 April 2005.

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

Done at Brussels, 7 April 2005.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 78.

(2)OJ L 81, 30.3.2005, p. 6.

(3)OJ L 177, 28.7.1995, p. 4. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 777/2004 (OJ L 123, 27.4.2004, p. 50).

----
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


       	<S>	<C>

<ARTICLE>5

<S>                                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                    SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                                 35828
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 1228275
<ALLOWANCES>                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                     1803484
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                          3840817
<PP&E>                                                 1327524
<DEPRECIATION>                               1119550
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4583703
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                  2248771
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         43540
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<OTHER-SE>                                        2146899 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 4583703
<SALES>                                              7152408
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         7152408
<CGS>                                                    4544011
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  4544011
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       99758
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            516857
<INCOME-TAX>                                    162200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    354657
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      354657
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .08
        

</TABLE>
MK 401(k) Amendment


 Exhibit 10.5 
 Amendment Two 
 Morgan, Keegan & Company, Inc. Revised Profit Sharing 
 and Retirement Savings Plan 
 WHEREAS
Morgan, Keegan & Company, Inc. (the “Company”) adopted the Morgan, Keegan & Company, Inc. Revised Profit Sharing and Retirement Savings Plan generally effective January 1, 2002 as amended and restated (the
“Plan”); and 
 WHEREAS the Company reserved the right to amend the Plan; and 
 WHEREAS the Company has delegated the authority to amend the Plan to the Benefits Management Committee of its parent company, Regions Financial
Corporation (“Regions”); and 
 WHEREAS the Company now desires to amend the Plan to suspend matching contributions; 
 NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended to read as follows: 
 1. 
 Effective April 1, 2009 Section 3.3 of the Plan is amended by adding the following subsection
(a) to the end thereof: 
  

	 	(a)	Temporary Suspension of Matching Contributions. Notwithstanding the above, no Matching Contributions shall be made with respect to Basic Elective Contributions or
Compensation attributable to pay periods that begin after March 31, 2009. 

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
§ 82.15 How will NIOSH evaluate the completeness and adequacy of individual monitoring data? ( a ) NIOSH will evaluate the completeness and adequacy of an individual's monitoring data provided by DOE through one or more possible measures including, but not limited to: ( 1 ) Comparisons with information provided by claimants, co-workers, and other witnesses;
( 2 ) Comparisons with available information on area monitoring, production processes, and radiologic protection programs;
( 3 ) Comparisons with information documented in the records of unions representing covered employees;
( 4 ) Comparisons with data available on co-workers; and
( 5 ) Reviews of DOE contractor record systems.
( b ) NIOSH will evaluate the instruments and procedures used to collect individual monitoring data to determine whether they adequately characterized the radiation environments in which the covered employee worked, (adequately for the purpose of dose reconstruction,) based on present-day scientific understanding. For external dosimeter measurements, this includes an evaluation of the dosimeter response to the radiation types (gamma, x-ray, neutron, beta, or other charged particle) and the associated energy spectrum. For internal exposure, the methods used to analyze bioassay samples will be reviewed to determine their ability to detect the radionuclides present in the work environment. An analysis of the monitoring or exchange frequencies for the monitoring programs will also be conducted to determine the potential for undetected dose.
§ 86.10 Nature and purpose of training grants. ( a ) *Long-term training project grant.* A long-term training project grant is an award of funds to an eligible institution or agency, hereinafter called the “grantee,” to pay part or all of the costs of organized identifiable activities, hereinafter termed the “project,” that are undertaken to establish, strengthen, or expand graduate, undergraduate, or special training, of persons in the field of occupational safety and health. Such grants may be used to support training in, for example, occupational medicine, industrial hygiene, industrial nursing and occupational safety engineering and the training of technicians and paraprofessionals in such areas.
( b ) *Short-term training project grant.* A short-term training project grant is an award of funds to an eligible institution or agency, hereinafter called the “grantee,” to pay part or all of the costs of organized identifiable activities, hereinafter termed the “project” that are undertaken to provide intensive training programs of less than 1 year for any one or a combination of the following purposes: ( 1 ) To provide specialized instruction for occupational safety and health professional or career personnel which will increase their competence in an area in their respective fields.
( 2 ) To prepare or expand the capabilities of occupational safety and health professional or career personnel for leadership roles as administrators or supervisors, and
( 3 ) To prepare or expand the teaching capabilities of occupational safety and health professionals and career personnel.
( c ) *Educational Resource Center Grant.* An educational resource center grant is an award of funds to an eligible institution or agency, hereinafter called the “grantee,” to pay part or all of the costs of organized identifiable activities, hereinafter termed the “project,” that are undertaken to provide for the combination of long-term and short-term training activities as described in § 86.13 (c).
[40 FR 29076, July 10, 1975, as amended at 42 FR 52401, Sept. 30, 1977]
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Notes:

1. In Patent and Trademark Office publications and usage the part number is omitted from the numbers of §§ 1.1 to 1.352 and the numbers to the right of the decimal point correspond with the respective rule numbers.

2. For nomenclature changes to part 1, see 68 FR 14335, Mar. 25, 2003; 87 FR 68904, Nov. 17, 2022.

#### § 1.54 Parts of application to be filed together; filing receipt.

(a) It is desirable that all parts of the complete application be deposited in the Office together; otherwise, a letter must accompany each part, accurately and clearly connecting it with the other parts of the application. See § 1.53 (f) and (g) with regard to completion of an application.

(b) Applicant will be informed of the application number and filing date by a filing receipt, unless the application is an application filed under § 1.53(d). A letter limited to a request for a filing receipt may be signed by a juristic applicant or patent owner.

[62 FR 53188, Oct. 10, 1997, as amended at 78 FR 62399, Oct. 21, 2013]

###### 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.