alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 3

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3 appear at 61 FR 7216, Feb. 27, 1996; 62 FR 35970, July 3, 1997; 62 FR 47532, Sept. 9, 1997; and 67 FR 46868, July 17, 2002.

#### § 3.102 Reasonable doubt.

It is the defined and consistently applied policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs to administer the law under a broad interpretation, consistent, however, with the facts shown in every case. When, after careful consideration of all procurable and assembled data, a reasonable doubt arises regarding service origin, the degree of disability, or any other point, such doubt will be resolved in favor of the claimant. By reasonable doubt is meant one which exists because of an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence which does not satisfactorily prove or disprove the claim. It is a substantial doubt and one within the range of probability as distinguished from pure speculation or remote possibility. It is not a means of reconciling actual conflict or a contradiction in the evidence. Mere suspicion or doubt as to the truth of any statements submitted, as distinguished from impeachment or contradiction by evidence or known facts, is not justifiable basis for denying the application of the reasonable doubt doctrine if the entire, complete record otherwise warrants invoking this doctrine. The reasonable doubt doctrine is also applicable even in the absence of official records, particularly if the basic incident allegedly arose under combat, or similarly strenuous conditions, and is consistent with the probable results of such known hardships.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501)

[50 FR 34458, Aug. 26, 1985, as amended at 66 FR 45630, Aug. 29, 2001]
Filed 11/14/07 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2007 ND 173

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Ronald Scott Thompson, Defendant and Appellant

Nos. 20070142 & 20070143

Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable Joel D. Medd, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Thomas H. Falck, Jr. (on brief), Assistant State’s Attorney, and Derick J. Roller (on brief), appearing under the Rule on the Limited Practice of Law by Law Students, 124 S. 4th St., P.O. Box 5607, Grand Forks, ND 58206-5607, for plaintiff and appellee.

Larry J. Richards (on brief), 115 S. 5th St., Grand Forks, ND 58201, for defendant and appellant.

State v. Thompson

Nos. 20070142 & 20070143

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Ronald Thompson appeals from an order revoking his probation.

[¶2]On appeal, Thompson argues the findings that he violated conditions of his probation were clearly erroneous because the district court relied on hearsay evidence.

[¶3]We summarily affirm the order of the district court under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

[¶4]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom
**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | (1) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--------|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                                                                                                                                                          |   |   |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| */s/                Ben-Tsur Joseph*Ben-Tsur                JosephChief                Executive Officer and Chief Financial OfficerDated:                May 20, 2008   |   |   |   |
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Lloyd Adam Toler, Appellant

No. 06-22-00154-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 

2 of Hunt County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 

CR2100144). Memorandum Opinion 

delivered by Justice Rambin, Chief Justice 

Stevens and Justice van Cleef participating. 

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find there was partial error in the 

judgment of the court below. Therefore, we modify the trial court’s judgment by changing the 

entry under “Fines” to “$100.00.” We modify the certified bill of costs by deleting the charge 

for “Court Appointed Attorney Fee,” changing the “TOTAL REIMBURSEMENTS” to 

$150.00, and changing the “GRAND TOTAL” to $570.00. As modified, the judgment of the 

trial court is affirmed.

We note that the appellant, Lloyd Adam Toler, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 16, 2023

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

SCOTT E. STEVENS

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
08/05/2010 10:14 FAI 3107256816 AWP-7 @002 

< S^ 

LI.S. Department 

ofTraTsportation 

Federal Aviation 

Adminbli idUun 

Western-Pacific Region 

Office of Regional Counsel 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA :;>0009-2007 

(310) 725-7128 

(310) 725-6816 facsimile 

— ( 

JUL Z 9 2010 

Via FacsimUe to (202^ 366-7536 

llxe Honorable Richard C Goodwin 

yVdministrative Law Judge 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Re: S/P Resources, Inc. > 

FAA Docket No. CP10WP0005 

This is a request for issuance of subpoenas to compel the appearance of the folio wii;.g persons at 

the hearing in the above-captioned matter: 

1. Paul Talley, c/o Alan Klein, Law Offices of Alan M. Klein, 16311 V Rntura Blvd 

Suite 1200, Encino, CA 91436; (818) 986-3141 

2. Elvester Richardson, c/o Alan Klein, Law Offices of Alan M. Klein, 16311 

Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200, Encino, CA 91436 (818) 986-3141 

3. Latonza McGowen, 12044 Peach St., Lynwood. CA 90262; (310) 413-1698 

Their testimony is relevant to the proceeding as they were eyewitnesses to Respond :nt's alleged 

offer to transport by air the subject hazardous materials in Count II of the Complain t. 

The witness should be compelled to attend the hearing in this matter currently set fcr September 

2,2010, in Gardena, CA. Please call me direct at (310) 725-7128 if there are any problems or 

questions with, this request. 

Sincerely, 

Naomi Tsuda 

Regional Counsel 

By: A ^ 

Cou^jafey Adoiph 

Attorney 

cc: Christopher Nissen, Esq. (via facsimile to 213-624-6999)
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 188 (Wednesday, September 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 50227]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23570]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services Administration


Statement of Organization, Functions and Delegations of Authority

    This notice amends Part R of the Statement of Organization, 
Functions and Delegations of Authority of the Department of Health and 
Human Services (HHS), Health Resources and Services Administration 
(HRSA) (60 FR 56605, as amended November 6, 1995; 67 FR 46519, as last 
amended Wednesday, June 11, 2008; 73 FR 33099). This Order of 
Succession supersedes the Order of Succession for the Administrator, 
HRSA, published at FR 73 33099, June 11, 2008.
    This notice deletes the Chief Financial Officer from the order of 
succession and adds the Chief Operating Officer to HRSA's hierarchy 
affecting the order of succession; this notice also changes the name of 
the Office of Performance Review to the Office of Regional Operations.

Section R-30, Order of Succession

    During the absence or disability of the Administrator, or in the 
event of a vacancy in the office, the officials designated below shall 
act as Administrator in the order in which they are listed:
1. Deputy Administrator;
2. Senior Advisor to the Administrator;
3. Chief Operating Officer;
4. Associate Administrator, Bureau of Primary Health Care;
5. Associate Administrator, Bureau of Health Professions;
6. Associate Administrator, HIV/AIDS Bureau;
7. Associate Administrator, Maternal and Child Health Bureau;
8. Associate Administrator, Bureau of Clinician Recruitment and 
Service;
9. Associate Administrator, Healthcare Systems Bureau;
10. Associate Administrator, Office of Regional Operations; and
11. HRSA Regional Division Directors in the order in which they have 
received their permanent appointment as such.

Exceptions

    (a) No official listed in this section who is serving in acting or 
temporary capacity shall, by virtue of so serving, act as Administrator 
pursuant to this section.
    (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, during a 
planned period of absence, the Administrator retains the discretion to 
specify a different order of succession.

Section R-40, Delegations of Authority

    All delegations of authority and re-delegations of authority made 
to HRSA officials that were in effect immediately prior to this action, 
and that are consistent with this action, shall continue in effect 
pending further re-delegation, provided they are consistent with this 
action.
    This document is effective upon date of signature.

    Dated: September 24, 2009.
Mary K. Wakefield,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E9-23570 Filed 9-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165-15-P
**
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, CoreyHenry, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2020-3(the “Exchange Act periodic reports”); 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 

3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports; 

4. Basedon my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement inall material respects; and 

5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria forasset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included inthis report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwisedisclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.

In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Wells FargoBank, N.A. and Computershare Trust Company, N.A. 

 
By: /s/ Corey HenryName: Corey HenryTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, as Depositor (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)Date: March 31, 2023**
§ 21.51 Determining employment handicap. For the purposes of § 21.50, an employment handicap will be found to exist only if a CP or VRC determines that the individual meets each of the following conditions: ( a ) *Vocational impairment.* The individual has a vocational impairment; that is, an impairment of the ability to prepare for, obtain, or keep employment in an occupation consistent with his or her abilities, aptitudes, and interests.
( b ) *Effects of impairment not overcome.* The individual has not overcome the effects of the individual's impairment of employability through employment in, or qualifying for employment in, an occupation consistent with his or her abilities, aptitudes, and interests. This situation includes an individual who qualifies for a suitable job, but who does not obtain or keep the job for reasons beyond his or her control. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3102)
( c ) *Contribution of the service-connected disability(ies) to the individual's overall vocational impairment.* ( 1 ) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, the service-connected disability(ies) must contribute in substantial part to the individual's overall vocational impairment. This means that the disability(ies) must have an identifiable, measurable, or observable causative effect on the overall vocational impairment, but need not be the sole or primary cause of the employment handicap.
( 2 ) When determining the individual's overall vocational impairment, the CP or VRC will consider the factors identified in § 21.50(c).
( 3 ) For determinations made on applications for vocational rehabilitation filed on or after March 30, 1995, but before October 9, 1996, the individual's service-connected disability(ies) need not contribute to the individual's overall vocational impairment.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3101, 3102)
[72 FR 14042, Mar. 26, 2007]
```

[House Report 107-427]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     107-427

======================================================================

 
      PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS TO SUSPEND THE RULES

                                _______
                                

 May 1, 2002.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Diaz-Balart, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 404]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 404, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to 
the House with the recommendation that the resolution be 
adopted.

                SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

    The resolution provides that it shall be in order to 
consider the resolution (H. Res. 392) expressing solidarity 
with Israel in its fight against terrorism under suspension of 
the rules at any time on the legislative day of Thursday, May 
2, 2002.
    The rule also provides that debate under clause 1(c) of 
rule XV shall be extended to one hour.

                                

```
SCALE 1:24,000

SOUTHWICK QUADRANGLE

1 0.5 0 1 MILE

1 0.5 0 1 KILOMETER

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

OFFICE OF THE STATE GEOLOGIST

AND EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS

Prepared in cooperation with the OPEN-FILE REPORT 2006-1260-G

Explanatory pamphlet accompanies map

Surficial Geologic Map of the Southwick Quadrangle, Massachusetts

Compiled by

Janet R. Stone and Mary L. DiGiacomo-Cohen

2010

Base from U.S. Geological Survey, 1972.

Map was scanned, processed, georeferenced,

rectified, and cropped by the Office of the

Massachusetts State Geologist. Image available online at:

http://www.geo.umass.edu/stategeologist/frame_maps.htm

Map units were reproduced from Schnabel (1971).

CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET

(SHEET 21 of 24)

(WE

S

T

G

RA

N

VILLE)

(WE

S

T

S

P

RIN

G

FIELD)

(WORONOCO)

(TARIFFVILLE)

72°45'0"W

72°45'0"W

72°52'30"W

72°52'30"W

42°7'30"N

42°7'30"N

42°0'0"N

42°0'0"N

Stone, J.R., and DiGiacomo-Cohen, M.L., compilers, 2010,

Surficial geologic map of the Heath-Northfield-SouthwickHampden 24-quadrangle area in the Connecticut Valley

region, west-central Massachusetts:

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1260-G.

Available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1260/G.
HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2022 Fiscal Transparency Report…Laos

# 					2022 Fiscal Transparency Report: Laos			

 In this section										

                -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Laos 

## Government-by-Government Assessments: Laos

During the review period, the government did not make its executive budget proposal or end-of-year report publicly available online.  It did publish its enacted budget, though not within a reasonable period, and published a partial end-of-year report.  Limited information on debt obligations was publicly available, but not for state-owned enterprise debt.  The completeness and reliability of budget information could not be evaluated due to the lack of publicly available documents.  Military and intelligence budgets were not subject to oversight.  Publicly available budget documents were not prepared according to internationally accepted principles.  The supreme audit institution did not meet international standards of independence.  It reviewed only a portion of the government’s accounts and did not make its reports publicly available.  The government specified in law or regulation the criteria and procedures for awarding natural resource extraction contracts and licenses.  Basic information on natural resource extraction awards was publicly available.  A moratorium on natural resource extraction awards was in effect since 2012.

Laos’ fiscal transparency would be improved by:

- Making substantially complete and reliable budget documents publicly available;
- Disclosing state-owned enterprise debt;
- Preparing budget documents according to internationally accepted principles;
- Subjecting military and intelligence budgets to civilian public oversight;
- Publishing comprehensive information on debt obligations; and
- Ensuring the supreme audit institution meets international standards of independence, audits the government’s executed budget, and makes its reports public within a reasonable period.

## View report by:

### On This Page

                    -  Government-by-Government Assessments: Laos 

Tags

Bureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsBureau of Economic and Business AffairsDivision for International Finance and DevelopmentLaos

Back to Top

                - White House
                - USA.gov
                - Office of the Inspector General
                - Archives
                - Contact Us

follow us
FacebookXInstagramYouTubeFlickrGovDelivery

              - Privacy Policy
              - Accessibility Statement
              - Copyright Information
              - FOIA
              - No FEAR Act

## U.S. Department *of* State

#### The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future
#### § 4.89 Ratings for inactive nonpulmonary tuberculosis in effect on August 19, 1968.

Public Law 90-493 repealed section 356 of title 38, United States Code which provided graduated ratings for inactive tuberculosis. The repealed section, however, still applies to the case of any veteran who on August 19, 1968, was receiving or entitled to receive compensation for tuberculosis. The use of the protective provisions of Pub. L. 90-493 should be mentioned in the discussion portion of all ratings in which these provisions are applied. For use in rating cases in which the protective provisions of Pub. L. 90-493 apply, the former evaluations are retained in this section.

| | Rating |
| --- | --- |
| For 2 years after date of inactivity, following active tuberculosis, which was clinically identified during service or subsequently | 100 |
| Thereafter, for 4 years, or in any event, to 6 years after date of inactivity | 50 |
| Thereafter, for 5 years, or to 11 years after date of inactivity | 30 |
| Thereafter, in the absence of a schedular compensable permanent residual | 0 |
| Following the total rating for the 2-year period after date of inactivity, the schedular evaluation for residuals of nonpulmonary tuberculosis, *i.e.*, ankylosis, surgical removal of a part, etc., if in excess of 50 percent or 30 percent will be assigned under the appropriate diagnostic code for the specific residual preceded by the diagnostic code for tuberculosis of the body part affected. For example, tuberculosis of the hipjoint with residual ankylosis would be coded 5001-5250. | |
| The graduated ratings for nonpulmonary tuberculosis will not be combined with residuals of nonpulmonary tuberculosis unless the graduated rating and the rating for residual disability cover separate functional losses, e.g., graduated ratings for tuberculosis of the kidney and residuals of tuberculosis of the spine. Where there are existing pulmonary and nonpulmonary conditions, the graduated evaluation for the pulmonary, or for the nonpulmonary, condition will be utilized, combined with evaluations for residuals of the condition not covered by the graduated evaluation utilized, so as to provide the higher evaluation over such period. | |
| The ending dates of all graduated ratings of nonpulmonary tuberculosis will be controlled by the date of attainment of inactivity. | |
| These ratings are applicable only to veterans with nonpulmonary tuberculosis active on or after October 10, 1949. | |

[29 FR 6718, May 22, 1964, as amended at 34 FR 5062, Mar. 11, 1969; 43 FR 45361, Oct. 2, 1978]
Date: 

### <t/oLI 

## J~o"' **1** 

## ctt Cf 

## O'Dfh\/\ 11 [M 

### I) Meeting: 1Yj 

## edlr:J lA)( 

### In 

### -tile.- 

# a.n f-d::ev/cum 

## IY]j 

## hhde Ru le(s) Discussed: Written Mate ri als? Yes/No Name Organ iza tion Phone N urn ber **6cw~va.** 

## Sn1m,k A !D( **;JO;;;-&g;;;:J-8c9o~** 

## /Slru'f 

# C <A v 

# fheJ, **~Pr ~/G9J~fj~(}q**  

# C,huc **L~o1\1Ck** 

## M> 7o 

### 3

**~** 

### Cf8o
**1lP** 1o 

## o I


## ~ **k\f~vJ** 

## \ 6DO 

# k? \ 2o2.- "e2 **051~** 

### 'A~~ 

## t-.9( **~** 

# AP:T 1 c:<r!K- 

### 6 **~.(- ~..{I**  

# JMk_-{it;ffk 

# c-fJ!l-- I I ""{/"' 

# /oF **~ot::Y"** 

### fV1 

# A 11 

### J r 1 v • l 

# I t!rfJJ 

## ~;/?;ld!> ' I 

### I

**~~I!(**

## t 

# JlfJ71l!J£d 

# " 13 IPW!J!r J 

## til/vi r'
#### Walter R. Lord, Respondent, *v.*John Moran, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, borough of Manhattan, rendered in favor of the plaintiff, upon a trial had, without a jury.

Action for broker’s commissions.

Woolsey Carmalt, for appellant.

Meyer & Josephson (Isaac Josephson, of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

This case involves substantially only a question of fact, upon which there was a sharp conflict of testimony. The judgment is amply supported by the evidence. The justice having found that the plaintiff produced competent parties as proposed lenders, who were ready and willing to make the loan upon terms acceptable to the defendant, the plaintiff is entitled to the stipulated commissions, notwithstanding the defendant’s refusal to complete the transaction. Van Orden v. Morris, 19 Misc. Rep. 497.

The exceptions taken during the trial do not present any ground for reversal.

As we are satisfied from a careful consideration of the evidence, that the decision of the justice is in all respects correct, the judgment must be affirmed, with costs.

[Present: Beekman, P. J., Giegerioh and O’Gorman, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
#### § 21.4271 [Reserved]