alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                   |                          |                                                                                                                                                            |
|----------------------------------------|-------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated:  April 13, 2011  | /s/Michael G. Mayer           |                                                                                                                                                            |
|                                   | Michael G. Mayer         |                                                                                                                                                            |
|                                   | Chief Executive Officer  |                                                                                                                                                            |
|                                   |
|                                   |                          |                                                                                                                                                            |
| Dated:  April 13, 2011  | /s/Holly L. Schreiber    |                                                                                                                                                            |
|                                   | Holly L. Schreiber       |                                                                                                                                                            |
|                                   | Chief Financial Officer       |                                                                                                                                                            |
|                                   |                          |                                                                                                                                                            |
|                                   |                          |                                                                                                                                                            |
| *                                 |                          | This certificate is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other purpose. |
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 182 (Thursday, September 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 65208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20411]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: September 21, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
September 14, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Contract 53 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2023-266, CP2023-269.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-20411 Filed 9-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Case No. 8,765.

#### The McDONALD.

[Cited in The E. A. Packer, Case No. 4.241. Nowhere reported; opinion- not now accessible.]

McDONALD, The. See Case No. 13,716.
Number of 

water-budget 

subareas

Area 

(square 

miles)

Mean recharge as 

a percentage of 

water input1

Number of 

water-budget 

subareas

Area 

(square 

miles)

Mean recharge as 

a percentage of 

water input1

Number of 

water-budget 

subareas

Area 

(square 

miles)

Mean recharge as 

a percentage of 

water input1

Open native forest (outside fog zone) 279 0.46 0.3 0 – – 0 – –

Closed native forest (outside fog zone) 0 – – 0 – – 0 – –

Alien and mixed forest (outside fog zone) 2 <0.005 0.0 0 – – 0 – –

Open native forest (inside fog zone) 1,727 21.67 10.1 20 0.02 37.3 0 – –

Closed native forest (inside fog zone) 28 0.14 9.0 3 <0.005 38.2 0 – –

Alien and mixed forest (inside fog zone) 0 – – 3 0.04 19.9 0 – –

Shrubland 2,751 27.44 26.9 0 – – 0 – –

Agriculture: Macadamia 0 – – 0 – – 0 – –

Coffee 0 – – 0 – – 0 – –

Diversified 0 – – 80 0.30 15.3 0 – –

Forest (eucalyptus) 0 – – 0 – – 0 – –

Fallow/Grassland 0 – – 0 – – 0 – –

Golf course 0 – – 119 0.50 0.7 0 – –

Low-intensity developed 259 0.65 13.5 1,404 2.76 5.6 0 – –

High-intensity developed 399 0.52 40.7 13 0.02 58.4 0 – –

Grassland 2,836 202.37 5.0 153 1.14 42.2 0 – –

Sparsely vegetated 2,003 41.47 25.2 2 <0.005 41.9 0 – –

Wetland vegetation 0 – – 0 – – 0 – –

Water body2 28 0.07 – 5 0.01 – 0 – –

2

Recharge was not calculated using the water-budget model (see USGS SIR 2011–5078, p. 28).

1

Recharge as a percentage of water input was calculated for each subarea using the formula: [(recharge - direct recharge)/(rainfall + fog + irrigation)] x 100. Values for each subarea in a particular land-cover category were then multiplied 

by the area and summed, and that sum was then divided by the total area of that category to obtain a mean. Direct recharge is described in USGS SIR 2011–5078.

Table S-4. Estimated mean annual groundwater recharge as a percentage of water input for baseline conditions in the West Mauna Kea aquifer sector of the Island of Hawai‘i, compiled by landcover type and precipitation amount (refer to USGS SIR 2011–5078).

[<, less than; –, not applicable; water input is defined as the sum of mean annual rainfall, fog, and irrigation; baseline conditions are defined as 2008 land cover and mean annual rainfall for the period 1916–83; the 

West Mauna Kea aquifer sector consists of the Waimea aquifer system and is defined by the Hawai‘i Commission on Water Resource Management (see 

http://www.state.hi.us/dlnr/cwrm/mapsillustrations/gwhu_hawaii.pdf); reported mean recharge is an area-weighted average; no distinction is made between fog and non-fog conditions for shrubland, coffee, and 

eucalyptus forest plantations]

Land-cover description

Mean annual rainfall plus fog equal to 40 

inches or less

Mean annual rainfall plus fog greater than 40 

inches and less than 80 inches

Mean annual rainfall plus fog equal to 80 

inches or greater
From: Pastormkw@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:47:10 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Michael Walters

Lake Forest, CA 92630
From: judykallmeyer15@optimum.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:52:03 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Judy KALLMEYER

, 10703-2848
Case No. 13,488.

#### STONE v. STONE.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 119.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

June Term, 1816.

Pleading at Law — Non Assumpsit — Former Recovery.

The defendant upon non assumpsit, may give in evidence a former recovery of judgment against him upod an attachment in a court in Virginia; and such former judgment is a good bar to the action here.

Assumpsit [by William Stone against Edward Stone] for money had and received.

The defendant, at the trial, upon non as-sumpsit, produced a record of a judgment by attachment against him, in Virginia, for the same cause of action, at the suit of the plaintiff, and prayed the court to instruct the jury that if they were satisfied by the evidence that it was for the same cause of action, the plaintiff could not recover in this suit, which instruction the court gave. (THRUSTON, Circuit Judge, absent.)

Hr. Wiley, for plaintiff.

Jones & Key, for defendant

Motion by the plaintiff’s counsel, for a new trial, on the ground of misdirection of the jury by the court Refused.
From: agackle@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:23:29 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Andrew Gackle

Sugar Land, TX 77479
From: mcowenrms@pngusa.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:10:56 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Mary Ann McOwen

Levittown, PA 19056
From: bdubntx@windstream.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:42:20 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Barry Welsh

Tulsa, OK 74133
#### In re: Carmine ARTIGLIO, Debtor. E. Les Sorenson, Executive Director, California State Board of Equalization, Appellant, v. Carmine Artiglio, Appellee.

No. 00-56144.

B.A.P. No. CC-99-01797-KMaJ.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted May 16, 2001.

Decided July 11, 2001.

Before O’SCANNLAIN, TASHIMA, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

E. Les Sorenson, Executive Director of the California State Board of Equalization (“SBE”), appeals a judgment of the Bank*654ruptcy Appellate Panel reversing the bankruptcy court’s order dismissing Carmine Artiglio’s adversary proceeding on sovereign immunity grounds. Artiglio brought an action against Sorenson under *Ex Parte Young,*209 U.S. 123, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908), seeking a declaratory judgment from the bankruptcy court that certain state sales taxes he owed to the SBE were discharged in his Chapter 7 proceeding and seeking injunctive relief barring Sorenson from taking further action to collect such taxes. The facts and prior proceedings are known to the parties; they are not restated here except as necessary.

Sorenson contends that Artiglio’s action falls within one of the exceptions to the *Ex Parte Young*doctrine the Supreme Court articulated in *Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Tribe,*521 U.S. 261, 117 S.Ct. 2028, 138 L.Ed.2d 438 (1997), and *Seminole Tribe v. Florida,*517 U.S. 44, 116 S.Ct. 1114, 134 L.Ed.2d 252 (1996). Sorenson further contends that the State is the real party in interest in Artiglio’s adversary proceeding, and hence that this action is barred by state sovereign immunity. Finally, Sorenson contends that the Tax Injunction Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1341, precludes the bankruptcy court from issuing the injunctive and declaratory relief Artiglio seeks here.

Sorenson’s arguments are identical to the arguments we rejected in our recent decision in *Goldberg v. Ellett,*254 F.3d 1135 (9th Cir.2001). *Goldberg*thus directly controls this appeal. Accordingly, the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel is

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3
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 Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4712-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Tennessee (FEMA-4712-DR), dated May 17, 2023, and related determinations.

# DATES:

This change occurred on August 15, 2023.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Dean Webster, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Yolanda J. Jackson, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of Andrew D. Friend as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

                        The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA);                               ( print page 66481)                            97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.                    

Deanne Criswell,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2023-21008 Filed 9-26-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P