alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF TOWER FINANCIAL CORPORATION FOR
THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,768,029
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                       7,254,716
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            24,865,125
<TRADING-ASSETS>                               811,144
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        10,562,250
<LOANS>                                     46,069,619
<ALLOWANCE>                                  (690,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              90,640,883
<DEPOSITS>                                  68,765,667
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            304,752
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,530,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,040,464
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              90,640,883
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              1,169,494
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              185,048
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               660,153
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             2,014,695
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             678,499
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             678,499
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,336,196
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              2,276,397
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,425,872)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                 (1,425,872)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,425,872)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.63)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.63)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             (690,000)
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
#### § 1626.14 Right to inspect or copy data.

A person who submits data or evidence to the Commission may retain or, on payment of lawfully prescribed costs, procure a copy or transcript thereof, except that a witness may for good cause be limited to inspection of the official transcript of his or her testimony.
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74

38 40 42



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 500 18 12 06 00 07/17 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 17 Jul 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.81 N 76.74 WMeters AGL
###### Editorial Note on Subpart Z of Part 1910

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1910 appear at 84 FR 21597, May 14, 2019.

#### § 1910.1012 Ethyleneimine.

See § 1910.1003, *13 carcinogens.*

[61 FR 9245, Mar. 7, 1996]
#### MITCHELL v. GILLILAND.

(Decided November 23, 1916.)

Appeal from Coosa Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. S. L. Brewer.

No counsel marked for either party.

Per curiam.

Affirmed on certificate.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of State

          - [Public Notice Number 3308] 

The Overseas Schools Advisory Council, Department of State, will hold its Annual Meeting on Tuesday, June 27, 2000, at 9:30 a.m. in Conference Room 1107, Department of State Building, 2201 C Street, NW., Washington, DC. The meeting is open to the public. 

The Overseas Schools Advisory Council works closely with the U.S. business community in improving those American-sponsored schools overseas, which are assisted by the Department of State and which are attended by dependents of U.S. Government families and children of employees of U.S. corporations and foundations abroad. 

                    This meeting will deal with issues related to the work and the support provided by the Overseas Schools Advisory Council to the American-sponsored overseas schools. The agenda includes progress reports on the 1999 and 2000 Programs of Educational Assistance and efforts to secure financial support from U.S. firms for the 2000 program and presentations on the impact of the U.S. Standards of Learning Movement on overseas schools and the outlook for international education.                           ( print page 31048)    

Members of the general public may attend the meeting and join in the discussion, subject to the instructions of the Chair. Admittance of public members will be limited to the seating available. Access to the State Department is controlled, and individual building passes are required for all attendees. Persons who plan to attend should so advise the office of Dr. Keith D. Miller, Department of State, Office of Overseas Schools, Room H328, SA-1, Washington, D.C. 20522-0132, telephone 202-261-8200, prior to June 17, 2000. Each visitor will be asked to provide a date of birth and Social Security number at the time of registration and attendance and must carry a valid photo ID to the meeting. All attendees must use the C Street entrance to the building. 

Dated: May 8, 2000. 

Keith D. Miller, 

Executive Secretary, Overseas Schools Advisory Council, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 00-12140 Filed 5-12-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710-24-P
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18-1896V

UNPUBLISHED

COURTNEY GRAHAM,

 Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES,

 Respondent.

Chief Special Master Corcoran 

Filed: July 14, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU);

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine;

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

Administration (SIRVA)

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for 

petitioner.

Debra A. Filteau Begley, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

On October 10, 2018, Courtney Graham filed a petition for compensation under 

the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 (the 

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a right shoulder injury related to 

vaccine administration (“SIRVA”) caused by an influenza (“flu”) vaccine administered on 

December 13, 2017. Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing 

Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On July 10, 2020, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

 1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am 

required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the EGovernment Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to 

the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to 

redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of 

privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such 

material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2

at 1. Specifically, Respondent stated that he reviewed the records and concluded that 

compensation is appropriate under the Vaccine Act Id. at 1, 5. Respondent further 

agrees that Petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the 

Vaccine Act. Id.

In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that 

Petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
# EUR-Lex - 31998D0176 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 31998D0176

**98/176/EC: Commission Decision of 18 February 1998 approving the plan presented by Spain for the surveillance of classical swine fever (Only the Spanish text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) **

*
Official Journal L 065 , 05/03/1998 P. 0026 - 0026 *

COMMISSION DECISION of 18 February 1998 approving the plan presented by Spain for the surveillance of classical swine fever (Only the Spanish text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (98/176/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June 1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), as last amended by Council Directive 92/118/EEC (2) and, in particular, Article 10, paragraph 4 thereof,

Whereas, by Commission Decision 98/93/EC (3), Spain was requested to submit the Commission a national serosurveillance programme for classical swine fever;

Whereas the programme submitted by Spain provides for additional measures to prevent the spread of classical swine fever from the areas where the disease is present;

Whereas this programme has been examined and found to comply with the provisions of Council Directive 80/217/EEC of 22 January 1980 introducing Community measures for the control of classical swine fever (4), as last amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Sanding Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The programme submitted by Spain for the surveillance of classical swine fever is hereby approved.

Article 2

Spain shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions for implementing the programme referred to in Article 1.

Article 3

This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Spain.

Done at Brussels, 18 February 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 224, 18. 8. 1990, p. 29.

(2) OJ L 62, 15. 3. 1993, p. 49.

(3) OJ L 18, 23. 1. 1998, p. 35.

(4) OJ L 47, 21. 2. 1980, p. 11.
#### § 1915.1050 Methylenedianiline.

Note:

The requirements applicable to shipyard employment under this section are identical to those set forth at [§ 1910.1050 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/section-1910.1050).

[[61 FR 31431](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-31431), June 20, 1996]
#### FOLEY v CLEVELAND (city)

Ohio Appeals, 8th Dist, Cuyahoga Co

No 9156.

Decided Jan 14, 1929

Yetta Land, Cleveland, for Foley et.

Ben Levin and D H Laurienzo, Cleveland, for city.

*117LEVINE, J

The ordinance states that the term “common beggar” as used in the section, shall not be construed or defined as to prevent persons who are regularly connected with any charitable institution from soliciting or begging alms for or in behalf of such charitable institution.

On cross-examination of plaintiffs in error, the city sought to establish that the council for the unemployed was not a charitable institution and also sought to elicit information to the effect that the money collected by plaintiffs in error was not in reality to go to the unemployed in Cleveland. This attempt however, fell far short of the ..mark, and the evidence given by the plaintiffs in error in their own defense as to the purpose of the collection, and as to their connection with the Council for the Unemployed, .and its purpose, is not contradicted in any manner whatsoever.

Webster in his New Supreme Dictionary, defines the word “beggar” as follows: “One who makes it his business to beg or ask for alms.” Surely the word “common beggar” must be held to imply at least as much meaning as is applied to the term “beggar” alone. The evidence, in our opinion, is conclusive that these plaintiffs in error did not make it their business to beg or ask' for alms. That in the collection of funds on the day of the arrest, they acted as volunteers in behalf of the unemployed of Cleveland and that they were authorized so to do by the Council for the Unemployed of Cleveland.

In construing the ordinance and particularly the exception which it contains, the court in its charge to the jury, stated that under the ordinance no person is permitted to beg in the street or ask for money unless authorized by an organization recognized as a charitable institution. The ordinance contains no such language. The language in the ordinance is that the term, “common beggar,” shall not be construed to prevent persons who are regularly connected with any charitable institution. Any group of persons who band together for a charitable purpose and maintain headquarters for the purpose of dispensing chairty to the needy, properly comes under the term of “any charitable institution.”

We are not concerned with the methods employed by the Council for the Unemployed of Cleveland. We are limited to a construction of the ordinance in view of the admitted evidene in the case. We have come to the unanimous conclusion under the evidence presented >in this case, that the plaintiffs in error were not common beggars within the meaning of that phrase and within the meaning of the ordinance under which they were charged.

The judgment of the Municipal Court is therefore reversed and plaintiffs in error are ordered discharged.

Sullivan, PJ, and Vickery J, concur.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Trout Meadows quadrangle, Oregon:7.5-minute series (topographic)**
 
2012 | 2014 | 2015 | 2017
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.28/6:44118-H 4/
Item Number:0080-G-04 (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000932188
 
January 25, 2018
#### STATE OF FLORIDA v RODRIGUEZ

Case No. 86-327-AC

Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Appellate Division, Dade County

September 9, 1987

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Susan Odzer Hugemtugler, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.

H. Frank Rubio for appellee.

Before BARAD, MASTOS, FULLER, JJ.

OPINION OF THE COURT

MASTOS, Judge.

The State of Florida, appellant herein, appeals from ah order of the *145trial court granting the defendant’s motion to suppress all physical evidence, to wit: cash, cardboard backing, carbon paper and other evidence of lottery, obtained incidental to a stop and search of the defendant’s vehicle. The trial judge concluded in his order granting the motion to suppress that there was simply “no articulable suspicion” for the stop of the vehicle.

The issue in this case is whether the police properly stopped the defendant’s vehicle, i.e., whether the police had a founded or reasonable suspicion, which required further investigation, that the occupant of the vehicle had committed, was committing or was about to commit a crime.

A thorough review of the record in this case clearly demonstrates that the stop of the defendant’s vehicle was premised upon information received from a known, reliable, confidential information and independently corroborated by three days of police surveillance. All of this information taken as a whole, gave the police the right to at least stop the vehicle in question and, if possible, further investigate based on the information previously compiled. The subsequent investigation, of course, was made considerably easier in that the lottery papers were in plain view on the vehicle’s dashboard. Without question, then, the right to stop the vehicle coupled with the discovery of lottery papers in plain view gave rise to probable cause with which to make the arrest.

Accordingly, the trial judge was in error in granting defendant’s motion to suppress, and we, hereby, reverse and remand for proceedings not inconsistent herewith. See: Fla. Stat. §901.151; *Sumlin*v. *State,*433 So.2d 1303 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001073363
<NAME> AEI INCOME & GROWTH FUND 23 LLC
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,020
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,020
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,020
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,125
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (5,105)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,020
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    20
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,125
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,105)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,105)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,105)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
§ 1912.12 Termination of advisory committees; renewal. ( a ) Every standards advisory committee established under section 7(b) of the Act shall terminate not later than 2 years after its charter has been filed, unless its charter is renewed by appropriate action for a successive period of not more than 2 years. The procedure for renewal shall be the same as that specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) Each advisory committee established under section 7(b) of the Act which is in existence on January 5, 1973, shall terminate by January 5, 1975, unless it is renewed before the latter date. Before any advisory committee can be renewed, the Assistant Secretary must determine that such renewal is necessary, and so inform the Department of Labor's Committee Management Officer. The OMB Secretariat must be informed of this determination and the reasons for it. Such determination shall be made not more than 60 days before the scheduled date of termination. If the OMB Secretariat concurs, a new charter shall be filed renewing the advisory committee and a notice of the renewal shall be published in the Federal Register.
( c ) Unless provided otherwise by the Assistant Secretary, the duration of a subgroup of a committee shall not be longer than that of the parent committee.
( d ) No advisory committee required to file a new charter under this section shall take any action (other than the preparation and filing of charter) before the date on which the charter is filed.
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. 505 Eighth Avenue Corporation, Respondent, against William S. Miller et al., as Commissioners of Taxes and Assessments of the City of New York, Appellants.

Argued April 19, 1937;

decided May 25, 1937.

*Paul Windels, Corporation Counsel (Oscar 8. Cox*and *Murray Sendler*of counsel), for appellants.

*Elmer H. Settel, Henry Cohen*and *Patrick A. Bolger*for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Loughran, Finch and Rippey, JJ.
Imidacloprid Pollinator Field Testing Tier II & III Meeting
November 18, 2013
Agenda

1. Bayer p resents the preliminary findings from the field feeding study (45 min)

2. Questions and discussion about preliminary findings (15 min)

3. EPA presents the hypothesis and study design elements for the Tier II tunnel study (30 min)

4. Questions and discussion (30 min )

5. CDPR and PMRA present the hypothesis and study design elements for the Tier III full field study (30 min)

6. Questions and discussion (30 min)