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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

No. 98-4460

WAYNE KEITH BARNES, a/k/a John

Wayne Vanparys,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.

Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge.

(CR-97-337)

Submitted: May 4, 1999

Decided: May 18, 1999

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

James T. McBratney, Jr., Florence, South Carolina, for Appellant. J.

Rene Josey, United States Attorney, Alfred W. Bethea, Jr., Assistant

United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Wayne Keith Barnes was convicted for possession with intent to

distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)

(1994), possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime, in

violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(c) (West Supp. 1999), maintaining a

place for the purpose of manufacturing methamphetamine in violation

of 21 U.S.C. § 856 (1994), and causing a substantial risk to human

life by manufacturing methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§ 858 (1994). On appeal he argues that the district court violated the

Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (1994), by granting the Government a continuance to indict him, that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress statements made by him to police during

questioning, and that the court erred by failing to exclude the testimony of two Government witnesses under the terms of his proffer

agreement. Finding no error, we affirm.

We find that the district court did not err in granting the Government a continuance to indict Barnes. See United States v. Keith, 42

F.3d 234, 237 (4th Cir. 1994). We find that Barnes did not clearly

articulate a desire to remain silent and cease talking to law enforcement agents, and therefore any statements made by Barnes during the

continued interrogation were admissible. See Davis v. United States,

512 U.S. 452, 459 (1994). Finally, we find that the district court did

not err in admitting the testimony of Pierce and Whitlow because the

Government was able to derive the information the witnesses testified

to from an independent source and therefore immunity was not implicated. See United States v. McHan, 101 F.3d 1027, 1036 (4th Cir.

1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1281 (1997).

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 2
EXHIBIT 11.1



                                ZITEL CORPORATION

                   COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON
                           AND COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARE


                                            Year Ended September 30,       
                                     -------------------------------------
                                         1994         1995         1996
                                     -----------  -----------  -----------
Average common shares                
  outstanding                         12,654,000   14,158,000   14,726,000
                                     
Computation of incremental           
  outstanding shares                 
    Net effect of dilutive           
     stock options based             
     on treasury stock               
     method                                    0    1,008,000      900,000
                                     
                                      12,654,000   15,166,000   15,626,000
                                     
                                     
Net income (loss)                    $(6,961,000)  $8,526,000   $4,049,000
                                     
                                     
Net income (loss) per share          $     (0.55)  $     0.56   $     0.26
                                     
                            




Primary and fully  diluted  income (loss) per share differ by less than one cent
in all periods.








                                     Page 43
SPIVAKLIPTON tp

ATTORNEYS AT Law Nicole Cuda Pérez
nperez@spivaklipton.com

1700 Broadway
New York, NY 10019
T 212.765.2100
F 212.765.8954
spivaklipton.com

August 26, 2010

VIA Federal eRulemaking Portal

Re: Comments on the Patient Protection and Affordable care Act;
Requirements for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance
Issuers Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
Relating to Preexisting Condition Exclusions, Lifetime and
Annual Limits, Rescissions, and Patient Protections; Final Rule
and Proposed Rule

To Whom it May Concern:

The Interim Final Regulations implementing the rules for group health plans
regarding lifetime and annual dollar limits on benefits as written do not exempt small
supplemental union benefits plans from the provisions. The effect of failing to provide
such exemptions would render many of these small supplemental funds incapable of
continuing to provide coverage to participants.

The type of fund this comment focuses on is a self-insured union benefit fund
that covers certain municipal employees (non-federal government employees). The
plan pays up to a current maximum of $5,000 for a participant's family’s covered
prescription drug costs per year. The plan was created to supplement a health plan
already provided to municipal employees by the municipality; however the health plan
provided by the municipality does not include prescription drug coverage at all. After
the plan covers the first $5,000 worth of prescription drug costs per family per year,
participants and their family members still have access to the plan’s prescription drug
plan which negotiates discounts with participating pharmacies. This plan is not a health
reimbursement arrangement, though it operates similarly to one.

The concern for this type of supplemental fund is that the Interim Final
Regulations prohibit group health plans from imposing lifetime or annual limits on the
dollar value of health benefits generally. Since prescription drugs are considered an
essential health benefit, the way the Interim Final Regulations are written, the fund
described above would not be allowed to limit the amount of out-of-pocket expenses
covered annually by the fund. This would result in the fund ceasing to offer the benefit
at all; participants would be paying more out-of-pocket for their prescription drugs—a

New York + Los Angeles


SPIVAKLIPTON tp

ATTORNEYS AT Law

VIA Federal eRulemaking Portal
August 26, 2010
Page 2

result directly at odds with the purposes of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act (“PPACA").

Defining “group health plan” in such a way as to exempt such supplemental plans
from the lifetime and annual limits would assist such funds in continuing to offer ways to
assist participants with their health care costs. Alternatively, continuing to apply the
opt-out provision under the Public Health Service Act to non-Federal governmental
plans, would also assist.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectful

Nicole’Pérez

New York + Los Angeles
REG-1 FYy{2-/0

Page | of 2

SEP 3

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION
PUBLICATION & REGULATIONS
r

ARCH

As of: September 03, 2010

PUBLIC Status Posted

Posted: September oe 2010
SU BMISSION 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-2010-0010-0654
Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488

SS is

Submitter Information

Name: Minesh Suman Patel
Address:

2119 Hanover Ave

Richmond, VA, 23220
Submitter's Representative: Minesh S Patel
Organization: Ariya Family Chiropractic Center, PC
Government Agency Type: Federal
Government Agency: HHS

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

Below are my comments regarding the 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 (PPACA).

I believe that every effort should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by

PPACA, especially as of January 1, 2014 when most of the reform components (Insurance
Exchanges, Subsidies, Tax Credits, etc.) come into play.

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


Page 2 of 2

The average consumer has a broad definition of “benefits.” Consumers view their health plan
beyond the covered benefits, cost sharing, and the contribution levels associated with the plan.
It is my opinion that the Rule may stil! result in some confusion to the marketplace in its
application. For example, if an employer raised the copayment level beyond the maximum in one
area (i.e. outpatient services) but retained the copayment level for primary care doctor visits,
does that mean a loss of grandfather status? Clarity will be critical both for the employer and the
employee.

Even by the most optimistic estimates, a substantial portion of the employee population will
remain outside the PPACA as of January 2014 based on the current rules. While I understand the
difficulty involved in making change, creating another large sub-population of excluded
individuals will only add to costs, increase confusion, and mitigate the potential impact of the
legislation.

The Rule needs to be clear, reasonable, and with no ambiguities involved in determining whether
a group health plan is “in or out.” The decisions the federal government makes today will

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 9/3/2010
SEP 8 2010 REC-120399- 10 Page 1 of 2
IN

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISLO’
PUBLICATION & REGULATIONS |As of: September 08, 2010

Received: September 07, 2010
Status: Posted

PUBLIC SUBMISSION Posted: September 08, 2010

Tracking No. 80b47a0f
Comments Due: September 27, 2010)
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0015
Requirements for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers under the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0015-0001
Requirements for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers under the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act:

Document: IRS-2010-0015-0025
Comment on FR Doc # 2010-15277

SS

Submitter Information

Name: Michele Colacino
Address:
14647 South 50th Street, Suite 150
Phoenix, AZ, 85044
Email: michele.colacino@trizetto.com
Phone: 480-735-7287
Organization: The TriZetto Group

General Comment

Re: §54.9815-2704T Prohibition of preexisting condition exclusions (temporary), (3)
Applicability to grandfathered health plans, (4) Example conclusion states

"the plan year beginning January 1, 2011 is the first plan year of the group health plan beginning
on or after September 23, 2010. Thus, beginning on January 1, 2011, because the child is under 19
years of age, the plan cannot impose a preexisting condition exclusion with respect to the child’s
asthma regardless of the fact that the preexisting condition exclusion was imposed by the plan
before the applicability date of this provision."

Many of our clients, who are healthcare insurance companies, state that they want to continue to
impose a preexisting waiting period on members who renew their enrollments.

Example: Member under age 19 has an 18-month preexisting condition waiting period for the
2010 enrollment period. The 2010 enrollment is for 1/1 - 12/31/2010, so the preexisting waiting
period would end 5/31/2011.

https://fdms.erulemaking .net/fdms-web-agency/ContentViewer?objectld=0900006480b47a... 9/8/2010


Page 2 of 2

The member renews enrollment for 2011. Our clients want to continue to impose the preexisting
condition waiting period to 5/31/2011 from the previous enrollment.

Is this valid or contrary to the regulation?

https://fdms.erulemaking .net/fdms-web-agency/ContentViewer ?object]d=0900006480b47a... 9/8/2010
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.84 MB)
 
 BAIS18; CENTCOM; Bahrain International Airshow; Air Show; jets;
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
## S IXTH 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________ Case No. 6D2 3

- 3859 Lower Tribunal No. 202 3

- DP

- 000 116

_____________________________ In the Interest of M.J., a child

. V.J.R

. , Appellant ,

v. D EPARTMENT OF C HILDREN AND F AMILIES , Appellee

.

_____________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County

. Greg A. Tynan , Judge.
F e b ruary 20, 2024
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED

. STARGEL , WOZNIAK and GANNAM, J J., c oncur.

Amanda Peterson, of Law Offices of Peterson, P.A., Mulberry , for Appellant. Kelley Schaeffer , Appellate Counsel , of Children’s Legal Services , Bradenton, for Appellee

.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 167 (Wednesday, August 30, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 59930]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18653]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, 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: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis 
Panel; Fellowships: Genes, Genomes and Genetics II.
    Date: September 20, 2023.
    Time: 3:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Rockledge II, 6701 
Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Linda Wagner Jurata, Scientific Review Officer, 
The Center for Scientific Review, The National Institutes of Health, 
6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-8032, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5b3732353f3a75312e293a2f3a1b353233753c342d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2d414443494c0347585f4c594c6d434445034a425b">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 
93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: August 24, 2023.
Victoria E. Townsend,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-18653 Filed 8-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
---

---

# EXHIBIT 23.11

CONSENT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We have issued our report dated March
27, 2006 for the financial statements of Ophir Holdings Ltd. for the year ended December
31, 2005. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Forms S-8, (File No. 333-61895 and File No. 333-55970) of Ampal-American
Israel Corporation of our report dated March 27, 2006, relating to the financial
statements and financial statement schedules, which appears in this Form 10-K.

# /s/ Kesselman &
Kesselman CPAs (Isr) A member of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited

# March 29, 2006



---

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM "THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS" AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,222
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 2,900
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     32,449
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           5,160
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             5,236
<LOANS>                                         68,469
<ALLOWANCE>                                        158
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 115,884
<DEPOSITS>                                      81,443
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,488
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,496
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,457
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 117,046
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,302
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  694
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 1,996
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 778
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 778
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            1,218
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       20
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    852
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    492
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         492
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       295
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.14
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.32
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   139
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        1
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  158
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            158
        


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-QSB
FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         341,760
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  147,007
<ALLOWANCES>                                    11,080
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               540,279
<PP&E>                                       7,837,070
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,215,652
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,269,126
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,795,538
<BONDS>                                      6,030,986
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        47,031
<OTHER-SE>                                    (681,588)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,269,126
<SALES>                                        237,659
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               255,491
<CGS>                                          198,814
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  535,281
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,608
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             127,489
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (409,886)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (409,886)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (409,886)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>