alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Paul f-lo stings 

ATIORNEY$ 

Manta 

Beijing 

Brussels 

Hong Kong 

london 

Los Anuetes 

Milan 

Nuw York 

orange CGunty 

Pillo Alto 

f>arls. 

San Diego 

san Fraoclt:co 

Shanghai 

Stamford 

Tokyo 

Washington, DC 

Paul, Hastings, J<'lnofsky & Walker tLP 

515 South Flower Slreet ·25th Floor~ Los Angeles., CA 900n-2228 

telephone 213 663 6000 • lac.o;lmlh:~ 213 627 0705 • \VWW.paulhaslings.com 

(213) 633-6253 

robettspan@paulhastings.com 

April 21, 2006 

VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. JY!AIL 

Carlene V. Mcintyre, Esq. 

Cbief, Opinions and Appeals Division 

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey 

225 Park Avenue South, 15th Floor 

New York, NY 10003 

Re: EWR.Rntes and Charges 

Dear Carlene: 

1997 8. 00005 

It was by letter dated October 11, 2005 that I flrst requested information on behalf of 

Continental Airlines, Inc. ("Continental") in connection with its review of rates and 

charges at Newark Liberty International .Allport (''EWR"), At that time, I expressed 

Continental's concern that rates and charges at EWR were unreasonably high and that the 

methodology used to arrive at those charges ~as not b:ansparent 

Since that first letter, we have .exchanged other correspondence. The Port Authority has 

taken the position that it will not provide much of the infortnation I requested, but in 

your December 23, 2005 letter to me, you promised to provide additional details of the 

actual costs and expenses that form the basis for the Public Aircraft Facilities ("PAF") and 

Ailport Services Factor (" ASF") components of the flight activity fee at EWR. In a 

subsequent letter dated January 18, 2006, you changed your position, and instead referred 

my request to the Port Authority's Freedom ofinformation Administrator. In that same 

letter, however, you stated "If you should flnd that you need more information after you 

receive d1e records of the Port Authority available to you under d1e FOI Policy, we will 

work with you to insure that you have the information you need within the constraints we 

have outlined. Accordingly, I will wait to hear from you after you review the records that 

are available to you under the Port Authority's Freedom oflnforrnation policy." 

I have now received some lin1ited documents from the Port Autho.rity's Freedom of 

Information Administrator, almost all of which were non-responsive to the questions 

originally posed last October, and none of wbich contained any details of the PAF and 

ASF costs. So, I hereby repeat my request, and ask dtat the Port Authority immediately 

provide the detnil promised in December. · 

LEGAL_US_W # 53511291.1 

EXHIBITYY 
Paul Hastings AHOI!N~ 

Carlene V. Mcintyre, Esq. 

April21, 2006 

Page2 

In making this request, I do not in any way mean to imply that I agree with the Port 

Authority)s refusal to provide the othe.r .inforrnation requested. On the contraryJ I 

continue to hope that the Port Authority will reconsider its position and provide all the 

lnfo.rmatjon Continental has been seeking since October. 

Since~~~)' 

Robe:t 

;~' S. Span 

ofPAUL,HASTINGS,JANOFSKY &WAUffiRLLP 

RSS:tnc 

LEGAL_U~UYfi/53511291.1
#### Minnie A. Bremer, Appellant, *v.*John C. Bremer et al., Individually and as Executors and Trustees under the Will of John H. Bremer, Deceased, et al., Respondents.

*Bremer*v. *Bremer,*125 App. Div. 918, affirmed.

(Argued January 10, 1910;

decided January 25, 1910.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April *58710, 1908, affirming a final judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a dismissal of the complaint pursuant to an interlocutory judgment of Special Term sustaining demurrers thereto in an action to have the will of John II. Bremer, deceased, declared void and to impress a lien upon the real estate of said decedent.

*William E. Warland*for appellant.

*John H. Corwin*for respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Werner and Hiscock, JJ.
Case 2:14-cv-12949-GAD-MKM ECF No. 1-1 filed 07/28/14 PageID.9 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:14-cv-12949-GAD-MKM ECF No. 1-1 filed 07/28/14 PageID.10 Page 2 of 2
- 1808
- 1809
- 1810
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2019 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2019

                   For the relief of Charmaine Bieda.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 21, 2009

Mr. Kanjorski introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                   For the relief of Charmaine Bieda.

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

SECTION 1. PAYMENT OF CLAIM.

    The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, out of any money in the 
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Charmaine Bieda of Kingston, 
Pennsylvania, the sum of $10,000,000, or, in the event of the death of 
Charmaine Bieda prior to such payment, $2,500,000 each to Annette 
Bieda, Bobbi Ann Dwyer, Madeleine Dwyer, and Michelle Pushefski. The 
payment required by this section shall be in full satisfaction of all 
claims that Charmaine Bieda may have against the United States relating 
to the murder of her daughter, Charlene Michelle Bieda Moore, by 
Charlene's husband Bruce Moore on December 19, 1984, while Charlene and 
Bruce were serving in the United States Army and after Charlene had 
requested that the Army protect her from Bruce and had informed their 
superiors that he was abusing her.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON AGENT AND ATTORNEY FEES.

    It shall be unlawful for an amount exceeding 10 percent of the 
payment required by section 1 to be paid to or received by any agent or 
attorney for any service rendered in connection with the payment. Any 
person who violates this section shall be guilty of an infraction and 
shall be subject to a fine in the amount provided in title 18, United 
States Code.
                                 <all>
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

_________________________________________ )

JULIETTE YOLANDA WHITTED

, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) C ase No. 19

- cv

- 370 (APM)

)

)

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, )

)

Defe ndant. )

_________________________________________ )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff Juliette Whitted , proceeding pro se, brings this action challenging the denial of

disability benefits and supplemental security income. See Compl., ECF No. 1 [hereinafter

Compl.] . Regrettably, her action is time

- barred and must be dismissed.

A person contesting a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security must

commence such action “within sixty days after the mailing to him of notice of such decision or

within such further time as the Commission er of Social Security may allow.” 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

The agency’s regulations add five days to the 60

- day statutory period to account for a person’s

receipt of notice sent by mail. See 20 C.F.R. § 422.210 (c); Ducusin v. Comm ’ r of Soc. Sec. , 650

F. Supp. 2d 76, 80 (D.D.C. 2009) (ob serving that, “[i] n effect, [§ 422.210(c)] alters the statutory

filing period for all litigants

— the 60

– day period commences not on the date of the notice, but on

the date of the plaintiff ’ s receipt of the notice ”). Thus, to be timely, a claimant has to in itiate suit

within 65 days of the notice’s date of mailing.

In this case, Plaintiff filed her action too late. After an administrative law judge denied

Plaintiff’s claim for benefits, the Appeals Council denied Plaintiff’s request for review

. See Mot.2 to Dismiss Pl.’s Compl., ECF No. 6, Decl. of Michael Sampson, ECF No. 6

- 2, ¶ 3(a). The Appeals

Council mailed its decision on November 13, 2018. I d. Thus, Plaintiff had to file her case within

65 days of that date, or January 17, 2019. But she did not do so, instead filing almost a month later

on February 13, 2019. See Compl.

Although Plaintiff made multiple filings after Defendant moved to dismiss, none responded

substantively to the limitations argument. See ECF Nos. 8

– 11. The court therefore has no basis

before it on which to consider equitably tolling. See Bowen v. City of New York , 476 U.S. 467,

479 (1986) (stating that the 60

- day time limit must be “ strictly construed ” as “a condition on the

waiver of sovereign immunity”). Plaintiff’s action is therefore time

- barred.

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted. A separate final

order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Dated: November 1 4 , 201 9 Amit P. Mehta

United States District Court Judge
Submitted on record and briefs February 23,

reversed and remanded for reconsideration March 27, 1996

#### In the Matter of the Compensation of Cody L. Lambert, Claimant. ROSEBURG FOREST PRODUCTS, *Petitioner, v.*Cody L. LAMBERT, *Respondent.*

(WCB 94-00599, 94-03943; CA A86570)

913 P2d 1390

Richard D. Barber, Jr., and Bostwick, Sheridan & Bronstein filed the brief for petitioner.

J. Michael Casey and Doblie & Associates waived appearance for respondent.

Before Richardson, Chief Judge, and Deits and De Muniz, Judges.

PER CURIAM

*132PER CURIAM

Employer seeks review of an order of the Workers’ Compensation Board that awarded claimant a penalty under ORS 656.268(4)(g). Claimant, by letter, has conceded that the Board erred and that our decision in *SAIF v. Cline,*135 Or App 155, 897 P2d 1172, *rev den*321 Or 560 (1995), justifies reversal of the order. We accept that concession.

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute on Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel, Development of Immunotherapeutic Products for the Treatment of Methamphetamine, Addiction.                    

*Date:*                         April 18, 2007.                    

*Time:*                         1 p.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Mark Swieter, PhD, Chief, Training and Special Projects Review Branch, Office of Extramural Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS, 6101 Executive Boulevard, Suite 220, Bethesda, MD 20892-8401, (301) 435-1389,                         *ms80x@nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.279, Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: March 20, 2007.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-1506 Filed 3-27-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### § 111.105-7 [Reserved]
§ 111.01-7 Accessibility and spacing. ( a ) The design and arrangement of electric apparatus must afford accessibility to each part as needed to facilitate proper inspection, adjustment, maintenance, or replacement.
( b ) Within an enclosure, the spacing between energized components (or between an energized component and ground) must be to the appropriate industry standard for the voltage and current utilized in the circuit. Additionally, spacing within any enclosure must be sufficient to facilitate servicing.
[CGD 94-108, 61 FR 28275, June 4, 1996]
----

*go to a larger version of Plate 3 (4.1MB)**go to metadata for this field activity, A-1-98-HW*

----

----

----

SusanA. Cochran

U.S. Department of the Interior,U.S.Geological Survey,Western RegionCoastal and Marine Geology
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 Education

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Jeanette Lim, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Room 3W314, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 401-9090 or by e-mail:                         *jeanette.lim@ed.gov*.                     

                        If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339. Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette)                               ( print page 10996)                            on request to the program contact person listed in this section.                     

*Electronic Access to This Document:*                         You may view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the                         **Federal Register**                        , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at the following site:                         *http://www.ed.gov/​news/​fedregister*.                     

To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530. 

Dated: March 7, 2007. 

Raymond Simon, 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 07-1149 Filed 3-9-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000-01-P
#### § 91.15 Burden of proof.

The burden of proving that an age distinction or other action falls within the exceptions outlined in §§ 91.13 and 91.14 is on the recipient of Federal financial assistance.
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 Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# SUMMARY:

Pursuant to authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463) and the secure Rural Schools and Community Self determination Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-393), the Black Hills National Forest's Custer County Resource Advisory Committee will meet on Thursday, April 5, 2007 in Custer, South Dakota for a meeting. The meeting is open to the public.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The meeting on April 5, 2007 will begin at 6 p.m. at the Black Hills National Forest Supervisor's office at 25041 North Highway 16, Custer, South Dakota. Agenda topics will be Status of Legislation and 2007 projects.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mike Lloyd, Hell Canyon District Ranger and Designated Federal Office, at 605-673-4853.

Catherine M. Rosane,

Support Services Specialist.

[FR Doc. 07-1586 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST FOR 8

- HOUR OZONE RACT SIP SUBMITTAL

Planning Area: Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District

Title 40 CFR, Part 51, Appendix V

– Criteria for Determining the Completeness

of Plan Submissions Enclosed Notes

ADMINISTRATIVE M ATERIALS

2.1(a) Submittal Letter from Governor's Designee X See ARB Executive Order S

- 11

- 0012

.

2.1(b) Evidence of Adoption X See Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District Board Resolution 2011

- 02 as certified by Board Clerk

2.1(c) Legal Au thority Citation X See ARB Executive Order S

- 11

- 0012

2.1(d) Copy of :

a. Attainment Plan b: Contingency Measures Not applicable

2.1(e) Evidence of Compliance with State's Procedural Requirements X Se e Northern Sierra Air Quality Management Distric t Board Resolution 2011

- 02 as certified by Board Clerk and ARB Executive Order S

- 11

- 0012 2.1(f) Evidence of Public Notice Consistent with 40 CFR part 51.102 X See Attachments

2.1(g) Certification of Public Hearing in Accordance with Notice X See Atta chments

2.1(h) Compilation of Public Comments and Responses T here were no comments , s ee District cover letter.

2.2(a) Identification of Regulated Pollutant Not applicable.

2.2(b) Identification of Attainment Area/Status Not applicable.

2.2(c) Estimate of Plan's Impact on Emissions Not applicable.

2.2(d) Demonstration that Plan Approval/Implementation Protects NAAQS Not applicable.

2.2(e) Modeling Support Not applicable.

2.2(f)

- Compliance/Enforcement and 2.2(i) Justification Not applicable.
#### White v. Turner, appellant.

*Usury—sale of valid mortgage at a discount.*

A valid mortgage for $1,000 was sold by the mortgagee at $50 less than its t face. *Held,*not to make mortgage usurious.

Appeal from a judgment, in favor of plaintiff,, entered upon the report of a referee. The action was brought in Chautauqua county by Allen White against Charles S. Turner and others, to foreclose a mortgage.

*Julius A. Parsons,*for appellants.

*D. Sherman,*for respondent.

*694E. Darwin Smith, J.

The question was principally one of fact which was found in favor of plaintiff on sufficient evidence, and the court refused to interfere with the finding.

*Judgment affirmed.*
§ 601.7 Mandatory declassification review. ( a ) The Division of Administrative Services is hereby designated as the office to which members of the public or Departments may direct requests for mandatory review for declassification under this provision. In the case of documents originally classified by the Foundation, this office shall, in turn, assign the request to the appropriate office for action within 60 days. In each instance, receipt of the request will be acknowledged in writing immediately by the office that has been assigned action. A request for classification review must reasonably describe the document.
( b ) Whenever a request is deficient in its description of the record sought, the requester should be asked to provide additional identifying information to the extent possible. Whenever a request does not reasonably describe the information sought, the requester shall be notified that unless additional information is provided or the scope of the request is narrowed, no further action will be undertaken. Upon a determination that the requested material no longer warrants classification, it shall be declassified and made promptly available to the requester, if not otherwise exempt from disclosure under 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (Freedom of Information Act) or other provision of law. If the information may not be released in whole or in part the requester shall be given a brief statement as to the reasons for denial, a notice of the right to appeal the determination of the Classification Review Committee, and a notice that such an appeal must be filed with the Foundation within 60 days in order to be considered.
( c ) When the request relates to a document given derivative classification by the Foundation or originated by another agency, the request and the document will be forwarded to the originator of the source document, and the requestor notified of such referral.
( d ) Employees presently cleared for access to classified information are encouraged to challenge classification in cases where there is reasonable cause to believe that information is classified unnecessarily, improperly, or for an inappropriate period of time. Such challenges should be brought to the attention of the Security Officer (Information) who will act thereon within 30 days, informing the challenger of actions taken. Requests for confidentiality will be honored.
#### § 122.356 Carriage of hazardous materials.

A vessel that transports a hazardous material, listed in 49 CFR 172.101, in commerce shall ensure the material is handled and transported in accordance with 49 CFR Parts 171 through 176.

[CGD 85-080, 61 FR 935, Jan. 10, 1996, as amended at 62 FR 51352, Sept. 30, 1997]