alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 123 (Monday, June 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 39462]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16119]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION


Agency Information Collection Activities; Emergency Consideration 
Request

    In compliance with Public Law 104-13, the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995, the Social Security Administration (SSA) is providing notice 
of its information collections that require submission to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB). SSA is requesting emergency consideration 
from OMB by July 12, 2000, of the information collections listed below.
    1. Representative Payee Report-Special Veterans Benefits-0960-NEW. 
The information collected on form SSA-2001 is used to determine whether 
payments certified to the representative payee have been used properly 
and whether the representative payee continues to demonstrate strong 
concern for the beneficiary's best interests. The form will be 
completed annually by all representative payees receiving special 
veterans benefits (SVB) payments on behalf of beneficiaries outside the 
United States. It will also be required at anytime SSA has reason to 
believe that the representative payee could be misusing the payments. 
Respondents are representative payees of veterans receiving SVB 
Payments under title VIII.
    Number of Respondents: 200
    Frequency of Response: 1
    Average Burden Per Response: 10 minutes
    Estimated Annual Burden: 33 hours

Background Information

    In November 1999, Congress passed the Foster Care Independence Act, 
and on December 14, 1999, the President signed it into law (Pub. L. 
106-169). An important part of this legislation, section 251, creates a 
new title VIII of the Social Security Act. Title VIII provides for a 
program of special benefits for certain World War II veterans.
    As a part of the title VIII administration, Section 807(a) of PL 
106-169, also provides that, if the Social Security Administration 
determines that it is not in the best interest of the beneficiary to 
receive benefits directly, payments may be certified to a relative, 
another person or an organization interested in or concerned about the 
welfare of the beneficiary. These individuals or organizations are 
called representative payees.
    You can obtain a copy of the collection instruments and/or OMB 
clearance packages by calling the SSA Reports Clearance Officer on 
(410) 965-4145, or by writing to him.

(SSA Address)

Social Security Administration, DCFAM, Attn: Frederick W. Brickenkamp, 
6401 Security Blvd., 1-A-21 Operations Bldg., Baltimore, MD 21235.

    Dated: June 21, 2000.
Frederick W. Brickenkamp,
Reports Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-16119 Filed 6-23-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4190-29-U
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 21, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 38595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-15601]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Center for Waste Reduction Technologies 
(``CWRT'') Sustainability Metrics Project

    Notice is hereby given that, on October 8, 1999, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Center for Waste Reduction 
Technologies (``CWRT'') has filed written notifications simultaneously 
with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
(1) The identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of 
the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking 
the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) 
of the Act, the identities of the parties are Center for Waste 
Reduction Technologies, New York, NY; America Institute of Chemical 
Engineers, New York, NY; Arthur D. Little, Inc., Cambridge, MA; Dow 
Chemical Co., Midland, MI; Eastman Chemical Co., Kingsport, TN; Eastman 
Kodak Co., Rochester, NY; E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Wilmington, 
DE; Merck & Company, Whitehouse Station, NJ; Minnesota Mining & 
Manufacturing Co., St. Paul, MN; Monsanto Company, St. Louis, MO; Owens 
Corning Co., Toledo, OH; Rohm & Haas Co., Philadelphia, PA; and 
SmithKline Beecham Corp., King of Prussia, PA. The nature and 
objectives of the venture are to develop a set of tangible metrics to 
assess the economic and environmental impact of business operations. 
The metrics are intended to allow the users to examine various options 
of chemistry, process, product and even product line to determine their 
relative contributions to sustainability. These metrics being developed 
by the project will cover mass and energy intensity, pollutants 
dispersion and the use of water, renewables and recyclables.

Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 00-15601 Filed 6-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
### Yc°*l °f^'W'1^1 Vff&^f £7,302-03

^'t'oms.R/PlBintiff Jtf j;oia»n4 / Ks:$panted.• Y^kl. 192015 

### T ,« X ,,_JW^B,i^""^^i^'-JS»i^-JW-ViAlt',-JC»l^'7Al0^... To XT»CME.4ET'«iJE; oR- C.mC4 ...+>* ^^^ ,MWH,CH *;„

tef^foL mwiifM flllfcYl mtfl T-a-C-X Mo. l71o277 Xowm wkK;t*xm$ 76367 "J^* u.4.G.$ I7^E*3bWU oA-.o3-ie-iS
§ 60-30.4 Form, filing, service of pleadings and papers. ( a ) *Form.* The original of all pleadings and papers in a proceeding conducted under the regulations in this part shall be filed with the Administrative Law Judge assigned to the case or with the Chief Administrative Law Judge if the case has not been assigned. Every pleading and paper filed in the proceeding shall contain a caption setting forth the name of the agency instituting the proceeding, the title of the action, the case file number assigned by the Administrative Law Judge, and a designation of the pleading or paper (e.g., complaint, motion to dismiss, etc.). The pleading or papers shall be signed and shall contain the address and telephone number of the person representing the party or the person on whose behalf the pleading or paper was filed. Unless otherwise ordered for good cause by the Administrative Law Judge regarding specific papers and pleadings in a specific case, all such papers and pleadings are public documents.
( b ) *Service.* Service upon any party shall be made by the party filing the pleading or document in accordance with 29 CFR part 26. When a party is represented by an attorney, the service shall be upon the attorney.
( c ) *Proof of service.* A certificate of the person serving the pleading or other document, setting forth the manner of service, shall be proof of the service.
[43 FR 49259, Oct. 20, 1978, as amended at 86 FR 1795, Jan. 11, 2021]
* 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. 07-10930

TRIPLE TEE GOLF, INC., a Florida Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NIKE, INC., an Oregon Corporation; TOM STITES & ASSOCIATES, INC., Doing Business as Impact Golf Technologies, Inc.; JOHN THOMAS STITES, III, Also Known as Tom Stites, Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

No. 4:04-CV-302

Before DAVIS, SMITH, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D June 11, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-10930

2 In this suit for misappropriation of trade secrets and for damages under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the district court, on remand, granted summaryjudgment by determining that plaintiffTriple Tee Golf, Inc., never received a right to sue on the claim at issue and was not a “consumer” under the state statute. We have reviewed the briefs and pertinent portions of the record and have heard the arguments of counsel. We find no reversible error. The judgment, accordingly, is AFFIRMED.
#### § 109-45.5102 General.

Disposal of Government-owned personal property in the custody of DOE organizations or its contractors in foreign areas shall be made in an efficient and economical manner, and in conformance with the foreign policy of the United States.
```

[House Report 106-707]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-707

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

 
WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO THE 
  SAME DAY CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED BY THE RULES 
  COMMITTEE

                                _______
                                

   June 28, 2000.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

   Mrs. Myrick, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                       [To accompany H. Res. 540]

    The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration 
House Resolution 540, 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 waives the provisions of clause 6(a) of rule 
XIII (requiring a two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the 
same day it is reported from the Rules Committee) against 
resolutions reported from the Rules Committee on or before the 
legislative day of Friday, June 30, 2000, providing for 
consideration or disposition of a conference report to 
accompany the bill (H.R. 4425) making appropriations for 
military construction, family housing, and base realignment and 
closure for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes, or any 
amendment reported in disagreement from a conference thereon.

                                  

```
# Comments on: Notice Amending Prior Notices Concerning In-Person Filings and Submissions
February 10, 2015 

Hearing Docket Clerk 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, SW 

Wilbur Wright Building #2W1000 

Washington, DC 20591 

Re: Arash Durrani 

Case #2012WP050039 

Dear FAA: 

SACKS 

SACKS 

ATTOR';EYS }.T LAW 

lam requesting a formal hearing on the above noted case. 

~ I 

FEB 2 7 2015 

HEARING DOCKET 

If you have any questions please feel free to contact my attorney, Stefan Sacks, at 

(323) 272-7877. 

Yours very truly, 

Arash Durrani 

cc. Lerre Green, Esq. 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of Regional Counsel 

P.O. Box 92007 

Los Angeles, CA 90009-2007 

1901 AVENUE OF THE STARS, SUITE 200 ·LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067 • 323.2 72.7877 

Sacks & Sacks is a Partnership consisting of Professional Corporations
§ 60-20.8 Harassment and hostile work environments. ( a ) Harassment on the basis of sex is a violation of Executive Order 11246, as amended. Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, offensive remarks about a person's sex, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when: ( 1 ) Submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment;
( 2 ) Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual; or
( 3 ) Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.
( b ) Harassment because of sex includes sexual harassment (including sexual harassment based on gender identity or transgender status); harassment based on pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions; and harassment that is not sexual in nature but that is because of sex or sex-based stereotypes.
#### § 301-11.27 Are taxes included in the lodging portion of the Government per diem rate?

No. Lodging taxes paid by you are reimbursable as a miscellaneous travel expense limited to the taxes on reimbursable lodging costs. For example, if your agency authorizes you a maximum lodging rate of $50 per night, and you elect to stay at a hotel that costs $100 per night, you can only claim the amount of taxes on $50, which is the maximum authorized lodging amount. This section is effective January 1, 1999, for CONUS locations and effective January 1, 2000, for non-foreign areas. For foreign areas, lodging taxes have not been removed from foreign per diem rates established by the Department of State. Separate claims for lodging taxes incurred in foreign areas are not allowed.

[FTR Amdt. 75, 63 FR 66675, Dec. 2, 1998, as amended by FTR Amdt. 108, 67 FR 57965, Sept. 13, 2002]
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 2, 2021

No. 04-21-00051-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF Y.P.C., ET AL, CHILDREN,

From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018-PA-02855

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

In this accelerated appeal, the reporter’s record was due on February 22, 2021. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 35.1(b). On March 1, 2021, court reporter Elva Chapa notified this court that her 

other duties have prevented her from timely filing the record, and she requested an extension of 

time to file the reporter’s record until March 12, 2021.

The request is GRANTED. The reporter’s record is due on March 12, 2021. See id.

R. 35.3(c) (limiting an extension in an accelerated appeal to ten days). 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 2nd day of March, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
§ 105-54.104 Responsibilities. ( a ) Responsibility for coordination and control of committee management in GSA is vested in the Associate Administrator for Administration, who serves as the GSA Committee Management Officer (CMO). This Officer carries out the functions prescribed in section 8(b) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. In doing so, the Officer controls and supervises the establishment, procedures, and accomplishments of GSA-sponsored advisory committees. The Organization and Productivity Improvement Division, Office of Management Services, Office of Administration, provides staff resources and furnishes the Staff Contact Person (SCP) to the CMO.
( b ) The Head of each Service and Staff Office and each Regional Administrator selects a Committee Management Officer (CMO) to coordinate and control committee management within the service, staff office, or regional office and to act as liaison to the GSA Committee Management Officer. The duties of the CMOs are as follows: ( 1 ) Assemble and maintain the reports, records, and other papers of any GSA-sponsored committee during its existence (Arrangements may be made, however, for the Government chairperson or other GSA representative to retain custody of reports, records, and other papers to facilitate committee operations. After the committee is terminated, all committee records are disposed of following existing regulations.); and
( 2 ) Under agency regulations in 41 CFR 105-60, carry out the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552 with respect to the reports, records, and other papers of GSA-sponsored advisory committees.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

DAMANI ROBINSON,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 74 WM 2021

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 30th day of March, 2022, the Application for Leave to File Original 

Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED.
# Comments on: 22-1252: SANDERS v. MCDONOUGH [OPINION], Nonprecedential
#### § 109-27.5104-1 Acquisitions.

DOE organizations and contractors shall contact the DOE Business Center for Precious Metals Sales and Recovery to determine the availability of precious metals prior to acquisition on the open market.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-cv-81870-BER

BESY ESPINO,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

__________________________________________/

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 

[ECF No. 39]

Ms. Espino asks the Court to rule as a matter of law that the United States is 

the sole cause of the automobile accident at issue in this case. There are disputed 

issues of material fact that, viewed in the light most favorable to the United States, 

could lead a reasonable fact finder to conclude that Ms. Espino caused the accident 

in whole or in part. For example, Ms. Espino testified that she did not try to brake 

when she first saw the Postal Service vehicle. Instead, she accelerated and tried to go 

around the front of the vehicle. ECF No. 45-3 at 37-38. She did not honk her horn. Id.

Although Ms. Espino argues that the accident happened so quickly that she could not 

prevent it, a reasonable finder of fact could reject that argument based, in part, on 

witness credibility.

Case 9:22-cv-81870-BER Document 63 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/03/2024 Page 1 of 2
2

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach 

County, in the Southern District of Florida, this 3rd day of May 2024.

__________________________________

BRUCE E. REINHART

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 9:22-cv-81870-BER Document 63 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/03/2024 Page 2 of 2
September 4, 2015

Mr. Jacob Thomas

681 Johnson Road Oliver Springs , TN 37840

Dear Mr. Thomas :

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from § § 45.23(b)

, 91.103(b)(2)

, 91.105

, 91.109 , 91.119, 91.121

, 91.151

, 91.405

, 91.407

, 91.409

, 91.417

, and p art 21

, Sub part H , and part 61 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can No t Process Your Request

We received your May 22, 2015 and July 17, 2015 exemption request filed in D ocket

No

. FAA− 20 15

− 2300 , but we are unable to process your request any furthe r. Your petition

does no t comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html . Thi s website helps the petitioner to meet Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requeste d information within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267

- 2999.

Sincerely,

/s/ Brittany Newton Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure3
# Comments on: 21-1115: QUEST DIAGNOSTICS INVESTMENTS LLC v. HIRSHFELD [OPINION], Nonprecedential
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

RENU B. LAL,

Petitioner

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN 

SERVICES,

Respondent

______________________

2021-2330

______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection 

Board in No. AT-0752-18-0564-I-4.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

GEORGE CHUZI, Kalijarvi, Chuzi, Newman & Fitch, PC, 

Washington, DC, argued for petitioner. 

 SONIA W. MURPHY, Commercial Litigation Branch, 

Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent. Also represented by 

REGINALD THOMAS BLADES, JR., BRIAN M. BOYNTON,

PATRICIA M. MCCARTHY.

 ______________________

Case: 21-2330 Document: 36 Page: 1 Filed: 09/09/2022
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

 PER CURIAM (MOORE, Chief Judge, HUGHES and 

STARK, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

September 9, 2022

Date

/s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court

Case: 21-2330 Document: 36 Page: 2 Filed: 09/09/2022
030P16

#### State v. Ryan Patrick Hare

Def’s *Pro Se*Petition for *Writ of Certiorari*to Review Order of COA (COAP15-808)

Denied
MAURO SOLIS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-4492

_____________________________/

Opinion filed December 2, 2014.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Gadsden County.

Jonathan E. Sjostrom, Judge.

Mauro Solis, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Michael McDermott, Assistant Attorney 

General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.