alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
REG IYVOF

wan 5 2009

B VISION
GAL PROCESSING D
PUBLICATION & REGULATIONS

RANCH As of: April 05, 2010
Received: April 04, 2010
Status: Posted
PUBLIC SUBMISSION Prestee: 2 05 2012
Comments Due: May 03, 2010
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0006
Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants & Beneficiaries in
Retirement Plans

Comment On: IRS-2010-0006-0001
Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants and Beneficiaries in
Retirement Plans

Document: IRS-2010-0006-0062
Comment on FR Doc # N/A

—————— — — ——
Submitter Information
Name: Roger L Wohiner
Address:
Arlington Heights, IL,
Organization: Asset Strategy Consultants
—— —

General Comment

This all sounds good on paper. My concerns center on the implementation of such a plan.

1. Annuities are generally offered and guaranteed by insurance companies. Is this how the
administration envisions this annuity option working? If so, which insurance companies would be
allowed to offer these rollover annuities? Would there be any controls to ensure that the insurers
meet some minimum tests for financial strength?

2. Fees and expenses are a key element of any annuity product. Would there be some oversight
and regulation to ensure fair and reasonable expenses? Who would define what constitutes fair
and reasonable expenses? Higher fees generally equal lower payouts for annuitants.

3. Would the annuities offer inflation protection as in the public sector or would the payout
remain flat as with many commercial annuities and corporate pension payments?

4. A much discussed regulatory initiative centers on making 401(k) plan fees and expenses more
transparent and standardized. Often, 401(k) plans administered by insurance companies are
anything but transparent regarding fees and expenses. Will the addition of this annuity option
add to the confusion regarding plan fees and expenses?

5. Will annuity payments be based upon some sort of standardized formula such as age, years of
service etc.? Will this formula be standardized across the all employers or will the insurers be free
to offer whatever payouts “the market will bear?”

6. If an insurer offering a rollover annuity product was to experience financial difficulty who would
stand behind the participant’s payments? The already strapped PBGC? State insurance
regulators? Someone else?

Again, on paper this is a good idea. I fear that this good idea could turn out badly for plan
participants if these and many other questions are not ironed out on the front end.

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 4/5/2010
1 **Consultation Questions Regarding an Information Collection Activity: Notice of Supplemental Distribution of a Registered Pesticide Product** 

**U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Distributor Company**  **Representative (s)**  **Consulted** Name : Company Represented : Contact Information (email and mailing) : **Questionnaire** (1) Publicly

Available Data
• Is the data that the Agency seeks available from any public source, or already collected by another office at EPA or by another agency ?
• If yes, where can you find the data? (Does your answer indicate a true duplication, or does the input indicate that certain data elements are available, but that they don = t meet our data needs very

well?) (2) Frequency

of Collection
• Can the Agency

collect the i nformation less frequently and still produce the same outcome? (3) Clarity

of Instructions The I CR is intended to require that respondents provide certain data so that the Agency can utilize them.
• Based on the instructions (regulations, PR Notices, etc.), is it clear what yo u are required to do and how to submit such data? I f not, what suggestions do you have to clarify the instructions?
• Do y ou understand that you are required to maintain records?
• Are there forms associated with this pr ocess? D o you use them? Are they clear, logical, and eas y to complete?2

(4) Electronic Reporting and Record keeping The Government Paperwork Elimination Act requires agencies make available to the public electronic reporting alternatives to paper - based submissions by 2003, unless there is a strong reason for not doing so. One such reason is that, at the present time, the Agency is unable to ensure the securit y of CBI that might be transmitted over the Internet.
• What do y ou think about electronic alternatives to paper - based records and data submissions? Current electronic reporting alternatives include the use of web forms @ /XMLbased submissions via the Agency ’ s Internet site and magnetic media based submissions, e.g., diskette, CD - ROM, etc. Would you be interested in pursuing electronic reporting?
• Are you keeping your records electronically ? If yes, in what format?
• Although the Agency does not offer an electronic reporting option because of CBI - related securit y concerns at this time, would y ou be more inclined to submit CBIon diskette (CD or DVD) than on paper?
• W hat benefits would electronic submission bring you in terms of burden reduction or greater efficiency

in compiling the information? (5) Burden and Costs
• Are the labor rates accurate?
• The Agency

assumes there is no capital cost associated with this activity . Is that correct?
• Bearing in mind that the burden and cost estimates include only burden hours and costs associated with the p aperwork involved with this ICR ( e .g., the IC R does not include estimated burden hours a nd costs for conducting studies), are the estimated burden hours and labor rates accurate? If you provide burden and cost estimates that are substantially different from EPA ’ s, please provide an explanation of how you arrived at your estimates.
• Are there other costs that should be accounted for that may have been missed?
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer

I, Nathan Schlenker, Chief Financial Officer of Atlantic Express Transportation Corp. (the ‘‘Company’’), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (i) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the ‘‘Report’’), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

/s/ Nathan SchlenkerNathan Schlenker
Chief Financial Officer


Date: February 13, 2008

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

---
IV

House Calendar No. 197

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 495

[Report No. 107–594]

In the Matter of James A. Traficant, Jr.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JULY 19, 2002

Mr. HEFLEY from the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, reported

the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and

ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

In the Matter of James A. Traficant, Jr.

1 Resolved, That, pursuant to Article I, Section 5,

2 Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, Representative

3 James A. Traficant, Jr., be, and he hereby is, expelled

4 from the House of Representatives.
House Calendar No. 197

107TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 495

[Report No. 107–594]

RESOLUTION

In the Matter of James A. Traficant, Jr.

JULY 19, 2002

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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

5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

1

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 18, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-51534

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GREGORY LEON PALMER, also known as Greg,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for

the Western District of Texas

(USDC No. 7:05-CR-48-12)

_________________________________________________________

Before REAVLEY, WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gregory Leon Palmer appeals his conviction and sentence arguing that the district

court abused its discretion in allowing Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) Special Agent
2

Will Kimbell to testify as to the meaning of code or slang words in recorded

conversations. We affirm for the following reasons:

1. Palmer contends that Kimbell was not qualified as an expert because no 

foundation was laid as to his experience in interpreting drug code and Kimbell

failed to explain the methodology he used in interpreting drug code. We disagree. 

Kimbell was the lead investigator in this case and had worked seven-and-ahalf years with the DEA, four as a task force agent on loan from his previous 

employer, a Florida police department, and three-and-a-half years as a special

agent. At the time of trial, he had participated in over 100 drug investigations and

had interpreted over 10,000 drug related conversations, approximately half of

which involved cocaine base. Kimbell explained the methodology he used to

decipher and interpret drug code. He testified that after he learned the subject’s

normal speech patterns, he then looked for words that did not fit the context of the

conversation (statements that did not make sense) and thereafter cross-referenced

those words with what had occurred during the investigation. Thus, Kimbell

testified as to his experience and methodology. We hold that the district court did

not abuse its discretion in allowing Kimbell to testify as to the meaning of code or

slang words in recorded conversations. See Burton v. United States, 237 F.3d 490,

499-500 (5th Cir. 2000) (approving of a narcotics investigators testimony as to the

meaning of code or slang words in recorded conversations); United States v.

Ceballos, 302 F.3d 679, 685-87 (7th Cir. 2002) (same). 
3

2. Even if the district court had abused its discretion in admitting Kimbell’s 

testimony, it would be harmless. There is overwhelming evidence of Palmer’s 

guilt in the record. 

AFFIRMED.
#### George A. Kyle, Plaintiff, v. Samuel K. Nester, Defendant.

Motion for new trial denied, and judgment ordered for plaintiff upon the verdict. Opinion by Haight, J.
#### Rowley H. Knapp, Respondent, v. Ira M. Deyo, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed. Opinion by Barker, J.; dissenting opinion by Haight, J.; Bradley, J., not voting.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

CONTINUING ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Appellate case name: Michel Fortier v. Brian Caress

Appellate case number: 01-19-00759-CV

Trial court case number: 2018-63377

Trial court: 281st District Court of Harris County

On November 11, 2019, appellant, Michel Fortier, filed an unopposed motion to 

stay this appeal “pending resolution of a related proceeding in the Texas Supreme Court.”

Appellant asserted that “the resolution of the other appeal, which is currently pending in 

the Texas Supreme Court, may render this one – or large parts of it – moot.” We granted

the motion and abated the appeal.

On February 3, 2020, the parties filed a “Joint Status Report,” informing the

Court that the “related case in the Texas Supreme Court is still pending” and requesting 

that the instant case “continue to be abated.”

We direct the parties, no later than 90 days from the date of this order, to file a 

motion to reinstate and dismiss the appeal, a motion to reinstate and proceed with the 

appeal, or another report advising the Court of the status of the related pending case in 

the Texas Supreme Court. If the parties do not respond as directed, the case may be 

reinstated on the Court’s active docket and the appeal will proceed under the applicable 

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The appeal remains abated, treated as a closed case, and removed from this 

Court’s active docket. 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: _____/s/ Julie Countiss______

  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: ___March 10, 2020__
---

---

Exhibit 23.7

Rotterdam, 13 March 2008

Consent Eurochem Maritime B.V.

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the
incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Forms S-8, (File No.
333-61895, File No. 333-55970) and Forms S-3, (File No. 333-140968, File No. 333-140969
and, File No. 333-140974) of Ampal  American Israel Corporation of our report dated
February 27, 2008 relating to the financial statements for consolidation purposes, which
appears in this Form 10-K.

Yours faithfully,

MAZARS PAARDEKOOPER HOFFMAN ACCOUNTANTS N.V.Corporate Assurance Services

A.G.           de Nijs RA



---

---
Page 1 of 2

ESSING DIVISION on. aff ;
GAL ETON & REGULATIONS PECHEUR AO UG 17 20%9
BRANCH

As of: August 16, 2010

PUBLIC Status Posted

SUBMISSION racking No. 80b3ca8a.
Comments Due: August 16, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0010
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathered
Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0010-0001
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as
a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Document: IRS-2010-0010-0108
Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488

Submitter Information

Name: Mha Atma S Khalsa
Address:

1536 Crest Dr

Los Angeles, CA, 90035
Email: drmhaatma@earthlink.net

General Comment

August 9, 2010

Mha Atma S Khalsa
1536 S. Crest Dr.
Los Angeles, CA 90035

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight
Department of Health and Human Services

Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC

P.O. Box 8016

Baltimore, MD 21244-1850

Re: Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to Status
as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

As an American citizen and consumer I want to formally comment on
the interim final rule regarding health plans and “grandfather” status (Document ID IRS-2010-
0010-0001).

I strongly believe the consumer protections included as part of the new health care law are vitally
important and should be extended to as many people as possible. Accordingly, every effort

http://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=... 8/16/2010


Page 2 of 2

should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (PPACA) via the above regulations. The triggers or conditions that would
extend these protections to consumers under currently existing “grandfathered” plans should not
be weakened or reduced in any way. I specifically support the position and detailed comments
offered by the American Chiropractic Association with respect to the implementation of these
regulations.

Sincerely,

Mha Atma S. Khalsa

http://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=... 8/16/2010
Page 1 of 2

1s REG-HYHIa-/°

PROCESSING DIVISION
COA CATION & REGULATIONS
ore ASG ESTING

PUBLIC Status: Posted a
Posted: September 03, 201)
SUBMISSION Comments Due: August 16, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0010
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathered
Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0010-0001
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as
a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Document: IRS-2010-0010-0688
Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488

Submitter Information

Name: Carla Ann Dudeck
Address:
9 Inverness Lane
Palmer, PA, 18045

General Comment

August 12, 2010

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight
Department of Health and Human Services

Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC

P.O. Box 8016

Baltimore, MD 21244-1850

Re: Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to Status
as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

As a consumer I wish to take this opportunity to formally comment on
the interim final rule regarding health plans and “grandfather” status (Document ID IRS-2010-
0010-0001),

I believe the consumer protections included as part of the new health care law are vitally
important and should be extended to as many people as possible. Accordingly, every effort
should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (PPACA) via the above regulations. The triggers or conditions that would
extend these protections to consumers under currently existing “grandfathered” plans should not
be weakened or reduced in any way. I specifically support the position and detailed comments
offered by the American Chiropractic Association with respect to the implementation of these

https://fdms.erulemaking net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 9/3/2010


Page 2 of 2

regulations.

Carla Dudeck

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 9/3/2010
----

----

I Communications

Commission

----

Taux de change de l'euro (1)

13 mai 2004

(2004/C 136/01)

1 euro == 

----

(1)

Source: taux de change de référence publié par la Banque centrale européenne.

----

----

COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE DES COMMUNAUTÉS EUROPÉENNES POUR LA SÉCURITÉ SOCIALE DES TRAVAILLEURS MIGRANTS

Taux de conversion des monnaies en application du règlement (CEE) no 574/72 du Conseil

(2004/C 136/02)

Article 107, paragraphes 1, 2, 3 et 4, du règlement (CEE) no 574/72

Période de référence: janvier 2004

Période d'application: avril, mai et juin 2004

----

----

AVIS

Le 14 mai 2004 paraîtra dans le Journal officiel de l'Union européenne C 136 A le «Catalogue commun des variétés des espèces agricoles — Neuvième complément à la vingt-deuxième édition intégrale» et «Catalogue commun des variétés des espèces de légumes — Troisième complément à la vingt-deuxième édition intégrale».

Pour les abonnés, l'obtention de ce Journal officiel est gratuite à concurrence du nombre et de la (des) version(s) linguistique(s) de leur(s) abonnement(s). Ils sont priés de retourner le bon de commande ci-dessous, dûment rempli avec indication de leur numéro «matricule d'abonnement» (code apparaissant à gauche de chaque étiquette et commençant par: O/..........). La gratuité et la disponibilité sont assurées pendant un an à compter de la date de parution du Journal officiel concerné.

Les intéressés non abonnés peuvent commander contre paiement ce Journal officiel auprès d'un de nos bureaux de vente (voir au dos).

Le Journal officiel — comme l'ensemble des Journaux officiels (L, C, CA, CE) — peut être consulté gratuitement sur le site internet: http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex

----
#### Forbes *v.*Noel.

Argued November 21,.

Decided December 19, 1907.

Injunction. Before Judge Pendleton. Fulton superior court. May 28,1907.

*Maddox & Sims,*for plaintiff in error. *L. W. Thomas,*contra.

Atkinson, J.

The evidence was of such character as to show no abuse of discretion in granting the injunction complained of.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002











In connection with the Annual Report of Alpharma Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ingrid Wiik, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(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 result of operations of the Company.







Dated:   March 24, 2003







/s/ Ingrid Wiik				
Ingrid Wiik
President and Chief Executive Officer







CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO



18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,



AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO



SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002













In connection with the Annual Report of Alpharma Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Matthew Farrell, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(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 result of operations of the Company.







Dated:  March 24, 2003







/s/Matthew Farrell		
Matthew Farrell
Executive Vice President and

Chief Financial Officer